Running Head: BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Bilingualism and late language acquisition

Romana Hyde

University of Idaho
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 2

Abstract

Discussions of bilingualism in academia are widespread in both subject and field of

study. This paper discusses the neurobiology of bilinguals compared to monolingual

individuals and relates these changes to cognition in terms of language, analytical

thinking, and divergent thinking. An overview of the theory of a Universal Language

Network related to bilingualism provides context for the measurable changes in both

physiology and function within the brain. Additionally, the magnitude of difference in

cognition is related to second language (L2) fluency and age of acquisition is examined.

Late acquisition of language is correlated negatively with fluency. Reasons for this are

still under debate, however sensitive periods of language acquisition caused by changes

in processing and decreases in neuroplasticity could explain the relationship between age

of acquisition and fluency. Native-like fluency is less probable for later learners.

However, evidence shows that at least near native-like fluency can be achieved and that

the cortical representation of the language network is similar to native speakers. The way

language learning occurs is often different between early and late acquisition, this along

with understanding of cognitive processes involved in language has implications for the

design of strategies for more efficient language learning and achieving greater fluency in

adults.

2
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 3

Bilingualism and late language acquisition

There is a famous quote by Charlemagne that states, “To have another language is

to possess a second soul.” (“Charlemagne Quotes”, n.d.) This is a grand statement, and in

the way Charlemagne intended, it is a beautiful sentiment. To know more than one

language is to have access to twice as much culture, literature, and people, allowing a

greater depth of exploration in the world. There is however, a more modern truth behind

the statement. Learning a second language alters human cognition in a number of ways.

Both in terms of the functional network responsible for language and in terms of more

general cognitive functions. Some would argue that individuals experience the world

through language, therefore it is a particularly interesting question to ask how knowing

more than one language changes that experience. This paper explores how bilingualism

affects both neurobiology and cognition and the factors that lead to individual

differences, such as level of fluency and age of acquisition. Further, this paper addresses

how age affects learning and ways in which adults can efficiently learn a second language

after the sensitive period of language development.

For context, language is incredibly complex and contains many different aspects.

In considering the nature of language and bilingualism it is necessary to consider all of

these aspects of language and their underlying cognitive processes so that comparisons

can be made. Generally, language consists of both written and spoken forms, this

includes sign language. However, there are also many underlying categories within

language, such as semantic knowledge of vocabulary, grammatical structures, and

phonological structure each of which will be considered later. It is also worth noting that

3
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 4

this paper will discuss bilingualism, not multilingualism. Although some subjects within

the studies discussed are multilingual, specific analysis of this is not noted. Therefore,

when making reference to a bilingual individual or bilingualism we are more generally

referring to the state of knowing more than one language fluently.

Universal Language Networks

The first question that must be answered when attempting to understand

bilingualism as a whole is whether or not humans process language through a Universal

Language Network (ULN). Essentially, the theory of ULN is that all languages are

processed through the same neural pathways regardless of how many languages one

knows. There is significant evidence for this, as similar and sometimes identical

activation is found for speech production, listening, and reading tasks even in distant

languages (Wong, Yin, & O’Brien, 2016). Neural structures implicated in language

include Broca’s area in the superior posterior temporal lobe, Wernicke’s area in the

superior posterior temporal lobe, and the arcuate fasciculus that connects them. More

specifically, reading causes activation of the visual association areas, fusiform gyrus, and

angular gyrus; and speech shows activation in the caudate nucleus, superior frontal gyrus

and superior longitudinal fascicle (Wong, Yin, & O’Brien, 2016). This paper specifically

focuses on the ULN in its relationship to bilingualism, addressing the question of whether

multiple languages are processed through the same functional networks in an individual.

The question of whether all human languages are processed in the same manner is

beyond the scope of this review.

4
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 5

A study conducted by Chee, Tan, and Thiel analyzed functional magnetic

resonance (fMRI) imaging during single word production in both Chinese and English.

Of the twenty-four participants, there was no significant differences in activated areas for

single word production in either language. Participants included both early and late

second language (L2) learners, however the finding was not linked to age of acquisition

for either language. (Chee, Tan, & Thiel, 1999). Additionally, meta-analysis of multiple

experimental tasks including word generation, word and pseudo-word reading, and

picture naming found a reliable common pathway associated with speech production

across experimental conditions. The same paper demonstrated that no significant

differences exist in areas of activation between a first and second language on a large

number of experimental tasks including word production and rhyming (Indefrey, 2011).

There is conflicting evidence on the nature of a universal network for reading,

some studies demonstrate minor differences in first and second language activation and

others not. However, a study conducted in 2014 observed that while there was no

difference in areas activated during reading, there exists differences in how those areas

are connected. They observed that among late Chinese-English bilingual participants,

visuo-orthographic seed regions and the right precentral gyrus had greater functional

activity in a Chinese rhyming task compared to an English rhyming task. The same seed

regions had higher connectivity to the left precentral gyrus in the English rhyming task.

The intensity of activation in the English rhyme condition was also found to correlate

with English language proficiency (Kao, Kim, Liu Y, & Liu L, 2014). This study

demonstrates the possibility of a universal reading network, while also emphasizing

5
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 6

individual differences in connectivity and function based on language proficiency or

alternative factors.

Described above are the neural networks involved in mechanical language tasks

such as speaking and reading. However, a knowledge of multiple structural aspects of

language are needed to complete those tasks in the first place. Three linguistic

components to consider are phonology, semantic vocabulary, and syntax; these systems

have been shown to have separate locations from the previously described language

network. A 2009 study examined the how brain structure correlated with semantic and

phonemic fluency in fifty-nine bilingual participants. They found that semantic fluency

was related to grey matter density in left inferior temporal lobe. Further, the study found

correlation between grey matter density bilaterally in pre-supplementary motor area and

head of the caudate nucleus. These findings were congruent with previous fMRI studies

indicating higher activation correlated with semantic and phonemic fluency in the

respective regions (Grogan, Green, Ali, Crinion, & Price, 2009).

Syntactically, a study examining functional activity in late-acquisition,

moderately-proficient to proficient French-English speakers found varying levels of

activation of the left caudate nucleus/putamen for syntax production tasks. The level of

activation was positively correlated to fluency as tested by the structure subtest of the

Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), which examines grammar proficiency

in English. Although similar areas were activated across participants, levels of activation

differed in relationship to participant fluency level. Overall, they found the greatest

differences in L1 and L2 activation in the least proficient participants. The findings in

6
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 7

this study were congruent with functional imaging studies using syntax reception as

opposed to production tasks (Golestani et al., 2006). The important implication of this

study and those previously mentioned, is that language learning causes neurophysical

changes over time in relation to proficiency and development. Activation remains

relegated to the same regions across languages, however the magnitude of activation in

those regions and the connections between them are altered based on a number of factors.

Specifically, fluency and age of acquisition are correlated, however more research is

needed to fully explore the question of what shapes language networks in bilingualism.

Language Control Mechanisms in Bilinguals

When considering a universal language network, it is important to question how

it’s possible to switch between languages smoothly and efficiently. This brings us to an

interesting study done by Kho et al. (2007) observing involuntary language switching in

two bilingual patients. In one case, a bilateral Wada test was conducted on a Dutch-

English bilingual patient with epilepsy. For clarification, a Wada test is the process of

anesthetizing half of the brain. The procedure involves the injection of amobarbital or

similar drug to a carotid artery through a catheter, this causes the half of the brain under

study to ‘fall asleep’ so that either physical or mental function can be assessed for a

single brain half (“Wada Testing”, n.d.). Following an injection of 125 mg amobarbital to

the left internal carotid artery, the patient found it very difficult to respond to questions in

Dutch and continuously substituted English words or spoke Dutch with a heavy English

accent. When the process was repeated on the right hemisphere, the patient responded

normally in Dutch. This indicates that left-hemisphere structure(s) are responsible for the

7
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 8

patients’ ability to switch between Dutch and English. The second patient was a

Chinese-French bilingual man undergoing intraoperative electrocortical stimulation. The

patient was asked to begin counting in French, and when stimulating the left inferior

frontal gyrus the patient would switch to counting in Chinese without any intention to do

so (Kho et al., 2007). Additionally, a study using fMRI and electrical stimulation

mapping across single language and language switching tasks in Spanish-Catalan

bilinguals indicated that the left posterior middle frontal gyrus (MFG) could be a key

mediator in language control (Sierpowska et al, 2018). The first study mentioned collects

data from epilepsy patients and the second from patients undergoing brain surgery, so

they cannot be perfectly generalized. However, the findings from these studies point to

specific control centers for managing language, specifically in the left hemisphere.

Overall language control is likely more complex than can be indicated in the

studies above. Bilingual individuals must actively choose which language is appropriate

based on situation cues and continue to monitor the situation for new conflicting cues,

activate the correct language pathways, and inhibit the incorrect pathways (Calabria,

Costa, Green, & Abutalebi, 2018). Some have proposed a more substantial neural

network involved in this process, including the right pre-frontal cortex, thalamus, left-

putamen, and cerebellum (Green & Abutalebi, 2013). The possibility of a substantial

network for language control has led to research surrounding executive function of

bilinguals compared to monolinguals. Some of these studies indicate that different

pathways are activated in executive control tasks in bilinguals, although whether or not

they perform better behaviorally is debatable (Calabria, Costa, Green, & Abutalebi,

8
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 9

2018). Other research indicates that bilinguals possess higher gray and white matter

concentrations in regions associated with cognitive control. However, research

concerning bilingual advantage in executive function has been widely disputed, and the

evidence that increased executive function in language transfers to other areas is

questionable (Wong, Yin, & O’Brien, 2016).

Evidence of cognitive processing changes with the acquisition of a second

language does exist. For example, a study conducted by Kasparian and Steinhauer (2017)

on Italian-English bilinguals demonstrates that L2 influences processing of syntax in

complex sentences. Specifically, ERP was used to monitor subject responses to correct

and incorrect grammatical structure in complex Italian sentences. Participants fluent in

English (L2) processed grammatically correct Italian sentences as incorrect when the

structure was incorrect in English and were less sensitive to semantic cues than their

monolingual counterparts. This effect was more pronounced in individuals with greater

L2 immersion and proficiency (Kasparian & Steinhauer, 2017) This study demonstrates

cognitive processing changes within L1 with the development of L2, an interesting and

scarcely explored effect. This is also possibly related to evidence that syntax is a

universal network, as discussed previously.

Further evidence shows differences in lexical-semantic knowledge in bilingual

individuals compared to monolinguals. While similar areas of activation are observed

between monolingual individuals and bilinguals, bilinguals show increased grey matter

volume in the connection between the anterior inferior frontal cortex and supramarginal

gyrus in the left hemisphere (an area implicated in vocabulary). However, behavioral

9
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 10

studies of vocabulary show comparative decreases in overall word number for both L1

and L2 compared to native counterparts (Wong, Yin, & O’Brien, 2016). Conclusions that

can be drawn from this relate to effortful processing related to greater grey matter volume

and overall vocabulary size. Essentially, the addition of the second language doubles a

vocabulary and so it becomes a more effortful task to produce the correct words in a

given situation.

Analytical and Creative Thinking

Second language learners experience a number of changes in cognition directly

associated with language, in addition to this there are compelling arguments that

bilingualism alters other aspects of cognition. If thinking is linked to language, it follows

that changes in language may alter thinking in other aspects related to language but with

greater implications. This paper addresses two such implications, analytical and creative

thinking related to bilingualism and second language acquisition.

In a study conducted by Jiang, Ouyang, and Liu (2016), a link between English

proficiency in Chinese students and scores on English analytical thinking (EAT)

examinations was found. In essence, analytical thinking tests score participants on their

ability to make distinctions, cognitive complexity, and level of active thinking.

Examinations were conducted using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count analysis on

student writing samples, which analyzes thought patterns in writing based on structural

components. The analytical thinking factor under discussion reflects specific structural

components such as categorical distinction and definitive language. Higher analytical

thinking scores is related to cognitive complexity and is higher in those with more

10
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 11

complex views of themselves and world events. Analytical thinking scores increased with

improved English proficiency. Further, the existing difference between native English

speakers and Chinese monolinguals indicates that aspects of the English language

improve certain areas of analytical thinking. Chinese students with native-like fluency in

English had scores more reflective of native English speakers, relating analytical thinking

to language acquisition. Because English has an emphasis on discrete objects and

Chinese emphasizes interconnectedness, the study authors indicated that changes in

analytical thinking may be due to these structural differences in the two languages (Jiang,

Ouyang, & Liu, 2016). This is especially interesting considering that the relationship

between the two indicates specific relationships between different languages and levels in

certain aspects of cognitive flexibility. In this case, English language skills indicate

greater achievement in some analytical thinking tasks and learning English corresponded

to higher levels of achievement in those same areas.

Another area of interest beyond analytical thinking is creative thinking. Measuring

creativity is not a straightforward task. Many methods have been used to understand the

possible link between bilingualism and creativity. Methods such as having individuals list

ideas following a story, metaphorical understanding, and others have been used to show

that bilingual individuals outperform monolingual individuals on average on tasks of

flexibility and originality. These measures are related to divergent thinking, which is

defined as the thought process used to generate creative ideas by exploring many possible

solutions (Onysko, 2015). These studies have interesting implications, however they are

correlational studies and cannot be used to determine causality.

11
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 12

In more concrete terms, a study by Alexander Onysko (2015) compared divergent

thinking in Māori-English bilinguals, English monolinguals, and a control group with

bilinguals of English and a non-Māori second language. One-hundred and seventeen

participants completed a meaningful interpretation task of novel English compounds

which were then measured by analyzing participants associative strategies and

application of metaphor and metonymy theory to examine differences in figurative

associations. Subjects performed similarly in the number of associations formed and the

diversity of those associations, however there were differences across conditions in the

interpretation of meaning. Bilingual participants were found to use a significantly greater

number of analogical associations compared to monolingual participants, indicating a

higher level of associative flexibility. No substantial differences were found in the

diversity of figurative associations made between groups, which does counter some

previous studies claiming a bilingual advantage in this respect (Onysko, 2015).

Of course, research concerning these aspects of cognition should be viewed

skeptically in most cases. While the evidence is compelling, it is difficult to measure both

creativity and analytical thinking. In this way it is unwise to claim a definitive advantage

in either of these areas, however research does demonstrate moderate differences which

are deserving of further study.

Critical Periods

An important factor in the individual differences observed within the changes

associated with learning a second language is level of proficiency. Proficiency ranges

from new learners to individuals with native-like fluency. Native-like fluency is a term

12
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 13

used to describe bilingual individuals whom have reached the highest level of proficiency

equivalent to an educated native speaker (“Language proficiency”, 2018). This distinction

is mostly important in academic terms, in most situations the distinction between native-

like fluency and proficiency are meaningless. While this is true, a great deal of

controversy exists both in academia and cultural wisdom on whether or not adult learners

can achieve native-like levels of fluency. The question of whether or not age of

acquisition determines outcomes of language development is complicated and highly

contested. Although many people believe it to be essentially impossible for late-learners

to reach native-like fluency, that claim has recently been under a great deal of suspicion.

We will now examine some of the evidence related to age of acquisition in language

learning, and the so called ‘critical period’ of acquisition.

Critical period and sensitive period are often used interchangeably to refer to the

same thing, a period of time in which learning is most effective. In terms of language,

this can often be used to refer to the sensitivity of infants in learning to distinguish

between phonology of languages as well as different grammatical structures. While

learning can occur outside of a sensitive period, the way in which learning occurs is

qualitatively different. Essentially, during sensitive periods in development learning is

bottom-up, with greater emphasis and sensitivity to environmental stimuli. Outside of a

sensitive period, learning is top-down directed with an emphasis on higher cognitive

functions. Neurobiologically, sensitive periods can be related to decreases in neuronal

density with maturation and an increase in myelination (Shafee, Buckner, & Fischl,

2015). Essentially, plasticity and the ability to solidify different experiential pathways

13
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 14

decreases with brain maturation, although it does not disappear. Furthermore, later

learners have more solidified representations of L1 that can affect the processing of L2

throughout the learning process (White, Hutka, Williams, & Moreno, 2013). This of

course does not indicate that language acquisition cannot occur outside of a sensitive

period, although it does indicate that there are differences in learning and possibly

differences in eventual neural representations.

Late acquisition learners tend to struggle with certain aspects of phonological

distinction. A rather famous example of this being Japanese learners’ difficulty in

distinguishing R from L sounds in English as no such distinction exists in Japanese.

While this does provide evidence for a sensitive period for learning phonological

distinctions, there are ways to improve this kind of learning in older individuals. Specific

phonological training has been shown to greatly improve abilities in distinguishing

speech sounds, and such training demonstrates functional changes in cortical activity

when distinguishing speech sounds (White, Hutka, Williams, & Moreno, 2013). Evidence

such as this indicates that plasticity remains even after the end of sensitive periods.

Many studies have examined the negative correlation between the eventual

attainment of fluency and age of acquisition. Generally, these studies conclude that this

indicates the existence of sensitive periods for language acquisition. While the nature of

sensitive periods has been previously discussed, it is worth further exploring this kind of

research. Phonology and grammar are two areas in which it is commonly believed that

age determines ability to attain native-like fluency. Meta-analysis of second-language

grammar attainment and age of acquisition demonstrated that there was a medium to

14
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 15

large effect size of age on attainment. Specifically, early learners below 11 years of age,

that experienced full L2 immersion had an advantage over late learners. No effect was

shown between early and late learners who began learning in school settings. Overall,

younger learners seemed to outperform older learners on aural and timed tasks compared

to written and untimed tasks where little difference was demonstrated (Qureshi, 2016).

While there does exist a statistical difference in grammatical fluency acquisition based on

age, this difference could be attributable to the immersive nature of early learners in

contrast to older learners. Further, younger individuals will have spent more time with the

language. The demonstrated effects may have more to do with environmental factors than

neurological differences between the two groups, meaning native-like fluency is still

achievable at a later age.

A study conducted using ERPs to evaluate temporal similarities in late acquisition

second language learners and native speakers in determining whether a sentence was

grammatical or not gives compelling evidence for acquisition outside of a sensitive

period. This study indicates that what determines differences in neural activity related to

grammar is not age of acquisition but instead language proficiency. As participants

became more proficient in a given language, their ERP responses became more similar to

that of native speakers, regardless of age of acquisition (Steinhauer, White, & Drury,

2009). The important implication of this study is that native-like fluency in grammar is

achievable regardless of acquisition age.

Nevertheless, research concerning the effects of age on language acquisition varies

widely in results and conclusions. Contrary to the finding above, a 2010 study explored

15
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 16

differences in semantic-lexical representations in early and late acquisition French-

German speakers. A combination of behavioral analysis and fMRI indicated that there

was a difference between the two groups. Behaviorally, early bilinguals made faster

decisions and fewer mistakes in determining the category for a given noun and imaging

revealed differences in activation across groups (Isel, Baumgaertner, Thrän, Meisel, &

Buchel, 2010) The authors of this study concluded that their research indicated a critical

period for optimal biological organization of lexical knowledge. However, this study

contradicts earlier research indicating that age of acquisition doesn’t affect semantic

knowledge between bilingual conditions. It seems that although there has been a

significant quantity of research on the effects of age on eventual fluency, no consensus

has been reached.

The discussion on age related to eventual acquisition of language is complex and

greatly debated within the field. One of the most debated questions is whether or not

native-like fluency can be achieved by late learners at all. While this question is

inherently interesting, it likely poses little value to most individuals outside of academic

circles. The difference between high-proficiency and native-like fluency is of no

importance for typical learners, and there is no question that late learners are capable of

reaching high-levels of proficiency. A massive study was conducted with over two-thirds

of a million English speaker participants that tested fluency related to age of acquisition

on an extremely difficult online test. While the general trend of this study indicated that

fluency attainment decreases with age, a small percentage of late-acquisition participants

did reach native-like performance (Hartshorne, Tenenbaum, & Pinker, 2018). There are

16
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 17

many reasons late learners don’t achieve beyond high-proficiency, and it may have a lot

to do with the fact that it isn’t necessary to do so for most people, not that it is

functionally impossible.

Optimal late-acquisition strategies

Discussions of bilingualism and the effect of late acquisition on learning brings us

to a concluding point. How can individuals use the above knowledge to best learn a new

language at a later age? The question of whether or not native-like fluency is attainable is

debatable, however there is no doubt that using more effective strategies can help learners

reach high levels of fluency faster with greater levels of cognitive change.

First, one of the most important factors in determining the rate of language

acquisition is motivation. Motivated learners who spend more time with the language will

learn faster than those who do not. Practice and greater immersion in a language is

essential to learning, motivated individuals spend more time learning and therefore learn

faster (Connolly, 2018). Motivation also factors into how you approach learning. As

discussed previously, outside of sensitive periods language learning is gated by more top-

down processing. Infants learn syntax and phonology easily through observation,

however later learners must be more calculated and methodical. Ways to take advantage

of this is to actively find patterns in grammar, hearing a sentence and then thinking of

other ways it could be organized and retain the same meaning. Adult learners may pick

up some patterns in language naturally, however progress is faster if those patterns are

actively looked for. (“The 5 Golden Rules of Adult Language Learning”, 2016).

Additionally, the 2013 White study demonstrated that specific phonological training in

17
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 18

distinguishing speech sounds led to substantial improvement in this area and physical

changes in neurobiology (White, Hutka, Williams, & Moreno, 2013). Clear goals and

active learning are important for adults, in essence it’s taking advantage of top-down

processing to more efficiently learn at later stages.

Previously the explicit practice of determining phonological difference and its

effect on cognition was discussed. Additionally, a study in which participants learned

Russian, either with prior awareness of grammatical gender or not, demonstrated that

participants with knowledge of grammatical gender were significantly more successful

than those without (Brooks & Kempe, 2012). This study demonstrates that explicit

instruction on grammar and metalinguistics is invaluable in adult L2 learners. This does

not imply learners could not pick up on these rules without implicit instruction, however

it does exemplify the benefits of a more active learning style surrounding grammar.

Worth noting is the role of private speech in learning a language and the overall

fluency achieved by bilingual individuals. Private speech is defined as speech directed at

oneself for behavioral self-regulation, self-guidance, and communication (“Private

Speech”, 2017). Research indicates that more ‘even’ bilinguals (ie. bilingual individuals

with similar levels of fluency in both languages) alternate between languages in private

speech. Flexibility in language used in private speech reflects the flexibility to alternate

between languages efficiently as well as to communicate thoughts effectively (Sawyer,

2016). The benefits of being consistent with using a second language in private speech

are evident, therefore if learners actively think to themselves in L2 they will improve

more rapidly than counterparts that do not do so. This is also related to the principle of

18
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 19

immersion. Learners who immerse themselves in a language, either through media or

through being in situations where only L2 is spoken, progress faster simply because they

get more practice. Strengthening neural connections by using language in different ways

in different settings relate to overall progress and proficiency.

Discussion

In sum, the concepts and evidence discussed in this paper briefly overviews the

cognitive changes separating bilingual from monolingual individuals. While there is

evidence for the existence of a universal language network, we can also see evidence that

knowing more than one language alters the physiological structure of this network as well

as functional cognition relating to language and thinking more generally. Many factors

affect the nature of these connections, the most commonly cited being proficiency and

age of acquisition. However, it is still unclear as to whether age of acquisition does affect

eventual attainment of fluency. While this remains unclear, there are specific strategies

based on the cognitive understanding of language and learning that can help adults more

effectively study a second language. These strategies are based on the nature of adult-

learners as top-down oriented, using more methodical strategies to learn patterns in

speech and grammar. Understanding the cognitive and neurobiological factors underlying

bilingualism in early and late learners allows for a more nuanced understanding of how

humans learn language, and language as a whole.

Understanding bilingualism is especially important in modern society. Over half

of the world’s population is fluent in more than one language (Wong, Yin, & O’Brien,

2016), and the world is becoming more connected than ever. While it’s possible to

19
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 20

experience other cultures using translators, more of the world is accessible to humans

than ever before and relying on translators can detract from that connection. The ability

to experience the world’s cultures is incredible and I personally believe it makes you a

better human and global citizen. Learning another language opens doors to new ideas and

worlds and alters the way you think, something that can only be described as incredible.

20
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 21

References

Calabria, M., Costa, A., Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J. (2018). Neural basis of bilingual

language control. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1426(1), 221-

235. doi:10.1111/nyas.13879

Cao, F., Kim, S. Y., Liu, Y., & Liu, L. (2014). Similarities and differences in brain

activation and functional connectivity in first and second language reading:

Evidence from Chinese learners of English. Neuropsychologia,63, 275-284.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.09.001

Charlemagne Quotes. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/charlemagne_182029

Chee, M. W., Tan, E. W., & Thiel, T. (1999). Mandarin and English Single Word

Processing Studied with Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. The Journal of

Neuroscience,19(8), 3050-3056. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.19-08-03050.1999

Connolly, P. (2018, January 25). Language Learning in Adulthood - Advantages,

Disadvantages, and Getting Fluent Faster. Retrieved from

https://www.clozemaster.com/blog/language-learning-in-adulthood/

Brooks, P. J., & Kempe, V. (2012). Individual differences in adult foreign language

learning: The mediating effect of metalinguistic awareness. Memory &

Cognition,41(2), 281-296. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0262-9

Golestani, N., Alario, F., Meriaux, S., Bihan, D. L., Dehaene, S., & Pallier, C. (2006).

Syntax production in bilinguals. Neuropsychologia, 44(7), 1029-1040.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.11.009

21
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 22

Grogan, A., Green, D. W., Ali, N., Crinion, J. T., & Price, C. J. (2009). Structural

Correlates of Semantic and Phonemic Fluency Ability in First and Second

Languages. Cerebral Cortex, 19(11), 2690-2698. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp023

Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J. (2013). Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive

control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(5), 515-530.

doi:10.1080/20445911.2013.796377

Hartshorne, J. K., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Pinker, S. (2018). A critical period for second

language acquisition: Evidence from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition,177,

263-277. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.007

Indefrey, P. (2011). The Spatial and Temporal Signatures of Word Production

Components: A Critical Update. Frontiers in Psychology,2.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00255

Isel, F., Baumgaertner, A., Thrän, J., Meisel, J. M., & Büchel, C. (2010). Neural circuitry

of the bilingual mental lexicon: Effect of age of second language

acquisition. Brain and Cognition,72(2), 169-180. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2009.07.008

Jiang, J., Ouyang, J., & Liu, H. (2016). Can Learning a Foreign Language Foster

Analytic Thinking?—Evidence from Chinese EFL Learners Writings. Plos

One,11(10). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0164448

Kasparian, K., & Steinhauer, K. (2017). When the Second Language Takes the Lead:

Neurocognitive Processing Changes in the First Language of Adult

Attriters. Frontiers in Psychology,08. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00389

22
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 23

Kho, K. H., Duffau, H., Gatignol, P., Leijten, F. S., Ramsey, N. F., Rijen, P. C., &

Rutten, G. M. (2007). Involuntary language switching in two bilingual patients

during the Wada test and intraoperative electrocortical stimulation. Brain and

Language,101(1), 31-37. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2006.11.009

Language proficiency. (2018, November 22). Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_proficiency#Proficiency_frameworks

Onysko, A. (2015). Enhanced creativity in bilinguals? Evidence from meaning

interpretations of novel compounds. International Journal of Bilingualism,20(3),

315-334. doi:10.1177/1367006914566081

Private speech. (2017, October 10). Retrieved from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_speech

Sawyer, J. (2016). In what language do you speak to yourself? A review of private speech

and bilingualism. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,36, 489-505.

doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.01.010

Shafee, R., Buckner, R. L., & Fischl, B. (2015). Gray matter myelination of 1555 human

brains using partial volume corrected MRI images. NeuroImage, 105, 473-485.

doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.10.054

Sierpowska, J., Fernandez-Coello, A., Gomez-Andres, A., Camins, À, Castañer, S.,

Juncadella, M., . . . Rodríguez-Fornells, A. (2018). Involvement of the middle

frontal gyrus in language switching as revealed by electrical stimulation mapping

and functional magnetic resonance imaging in bilingual brain tumor patients.

Cortex, 99, 78-92. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2017.10.017

23
BILINGUALISM AND LATE LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 24

Steinhauer, K., White, E. J., & Drury, J. E. (2009). Temporal dynamics of late second

language acquisition: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Second

Language Research,25(1), 13-41. doi:10.1177/0267658308098995

The 5 Golden Rules of Adult Language Learning. (2016, April 19). Retrieved from

https://www.fluentlanguage.co.uk/blog/adult-language-learner-rules

Qureshi, M. A. (2016). A meta-analysis: Age and second language grammar acquisition.

System, 60, 147-160. doi:10.1016/j.system.2016.06.001

Wada Testing. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/healthlibrary/test_procedures/neurological/wada

_testing_22,wadatesting

White, E. J., Hutka, S. A., Williams, L. J., & Moreno, S. (2013). Learning, neural

plasticity and sensitive periods: Implications for language acquisition, music

training and transfer across the lifespan. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience,7.

doi:10.3389/fnsys.2013.00090

Wong, B., Yin, B., & O’Brien, B. (2016). Neurolinguistics: Structure, Function, and

Connectivity in the Bilingual Brain. BioMed Research International,2016, 1-22.

doi:10.1155/2016/7069274

24