when is a bilingual an attriter? bilingualism as a two...

WHEN IS A BILINGUAL AN ATTRITER? –

BILINGUALISM AS A TWO-WAY STREET

Monika S. Schmid

Centre for Research in Language Development throughout the Lifespan (LaDeLi)

University of Essex

languageattrition.org

languageattrition

@MonikaSSchmid

THE OTHER SIDE OF BILINGUALISM

• the great majority of research on bilingualism focuses on phenomena that concern the second language

• research on what happens to the native language in this developmental process is much more limited

• what phenomena can we observe in the L1, and at what stages of development?

• which of these are attrition, and which of them are something else?

ATTRITION RESEARCH THROUGH THE AGES I: THE PRE-THEORETICAL PHASE (1930s-1970s)

1938: Einar Haugen, Language and Immigration:

“It is by slow, incessant attrition that

each foreigner has been turned into an American, idea by idea, and word by word.” (p. 1)

=> slowly developing recognition that the native language of immigrants may not only change across generations (shift) but also within the lifespan of an individual (attrition)

=> for several decades, work remained largely qualitative or hypothetical

Einar Haugen

photo: news.harvard.edu

ATTRITION RESEARCH THROUGH THE AGES II: THE L2 PHASE (1980s-1990s)

1980: Richard Lambert sets out to investigateif the time spent by American college students on learning foreign languagesis essentially wasted (because they will forget them once they leave college)

=> several ambitious projects are started

=> early studies find suprisingly high levels of retention (e.g. Bahrick, 1984)

=> this is confirmed by other investigations (e.g. Weltens,

1988)

=> L2 attrition research fizzles out

Richard D. Lambert

ATTRITION RESEARCH THROUGH THE AGES III: ENTER L1 (from the Netherlands) (~1982)

Theo van Els Kees de Bot Bert Weltens

• language attrition as a process that is not merely linguistic but also cognitive and social

• bridging the methodological gap between large-scale (corpus) studies of language shift and small-scale studies of attrition

• using a variety of elicitation methods (grammaticality judgments, reaction time studies etc.) (Köpke & Schmid 2004)

AN EMERGING FIELD AND ITS STRUGGLES

• what is L1 attrition?

• what kinds of processes/phenomena does it encompass?

• how do we measure it?

• at what point can we call L2-to-L1 transfer ‘attrition’?

ATTRITION RESEARCH THROUGH THE AGES III: COMPETENCE OR PERFORMANCE? (1980s-1990s)

• need to distinguish competence vs. perfor-mance phenomena in attrition, “[o]nce we can establish general principles for both types of change separately, then we can investigate the systematic relationships between the two” (Sharwood Smith 1983a:49)

• it is “important to know whether a given subject has lost or is even able to lose those kinds of underlying mental representations of his or her first language that may be referred to as L1 competence.“ (Sharwood Smith &

van Buren 1991: 17 (their emphasis), see also Sharwood Smith 1983b, 1989)

Mike Sharwood Smith

Paul van Buren

ATTRITION RESEARCH THROUGH THE AGES III: COMPETENCE OR PERFORMANCE? (1980s-1990s)

“effects of performance (accessing, processing, control) need to be sorted out from those of competence (tacit knowledge): it is erosion that reaches the level of competence that allows for interesting claims about and meaning-ful insight into the attrition process." (Seliger & Vago 1991: 7)

Robert M. Vago

EARLY MODELS OF ATTRITION

Stage I (onset of bilingualism)

Stage II

Stage III(onset of attrition)

systematic deviations in performance alone, competence stays stable

transitional stage, speaker is in possession of a new externally conditioned variety, but able to switch back to standard

emergence of new competence(Sharwood Smith, 1983)

Compound Bilingualism I: traffic mainly or exclusively L1-to-L2

Coordinate Bilingualism: both languages exist largely independently from each other

speaker is fluent in L2, traffic from Stage I is reversed, L2 ‘encroaches’ on L1 => attrition occurs(Seliger & Vago, 1991)

this is

attrition!!

this isn’t!!

WHAT IS LANGUAGE ATTRITION?

• restricted view: ‘attrition’ is structural, everything else is ‘just’ online conctact between two language systems (e.g. Meisel, 2017)

attrition is rare, confined to situations of extremely long periods of extremely low use alongside very high L2 proficiency

L2

pro

ficie

ncy

Length of Residence (LoR)

weeks months years decades

hig

hlo

w

attrition

not attrition

RESTRICTED VIEW OF L2-TO-L1 EFFECTS

IN SEARCH FOR COMPETENCE LOSS...

• for a long time afterwards, attrition studies had a somewhat unhealthy obsession with the search for ‘competence erosion’…

Monika S. Schmid

Barbara Köpke

A MATTER OF COMPETENCE?

• how do we know whether a bilingual speaker who uses the L1 differently from the monolingual native does this because of a change/restructuring of underlying knowledge, or because of processing issues?

• processing: if speaker occasionally produces target-like forms (Sharwood Smith & van Buren 1991:18)

• (later: competence if accuracy is below chance)

• competence if not amenable to introspection/ correction (Sharwood Smith 1983)

• competence maps on to off-line, performance onto on-line tasks (Montrul, 2017)

CONSISTENTLY INACCURATE?

• early investigations of attrition measured error rates against a hypothetical ‘baseline’ of 100% accuracy (Schmid, 2004)

• where comparisons between attriters and controls are made, findings typically show

• significant but small differences at group level

• a substantial proportion of attriters scoring within the control group range

• limited levels of inaccuracy in even the most strongly attrited participants (error rates < 5%) (Montrul, 2008; Schmid, 2013; 2014)


• example: investigation of German native speakers (Holocaust survivors) (Schmid, 2002, 2004)

• AoA: 11-40, AaT: 68-102, LoR: > 50 years

• astonishingly high accuracy on morphosyntactic features

THE DATA FROM SCHMID (2002, 2004)

num

ber

of

err

ors

per

1,0

00

sp

oken w

ord

s

group differences are minor, attrition effects modulated by attitudes and trauma

error rates generally estimated to be< 5% in even the ‘worst’ cases

this is in line with other attrition results

speakers outside native range on one feature tend to fall inside on others

which of these speakers can we legitimately call ‘attriters’?


• example: investigation of German native speakers (Holocaust survivors) (Schmid, 2002, 2004)

• AoA: 11-40, AaT: 68-102, LoR: > 50 years

• astonishingly high accuracy on morphosyntactic features

• no sign of any ‘underlying restructuring’ even in the most strongly attrited cases

• if these speakers do not have any actual ‘erosion’, then who will??

IN SEARCH FOR COMPETENCE LOSS...

• for a long time afterwards, attrition studies had a somewhat unhealthy obsession with the search for ‘competence erosion’…

• alas, we did not find any!

… but we foundlots of other things!

Monika S. Schmid

Barbara Köpke

• most immersed bilinguals report word-finding difficulties, problems with homophones etc. (see taxonomy of

lexical attrition effects by Pavlenko, 2004)

• it is almost axiomatic in attrition research to assume that the lexicon will attrite ‘first’ and ‘most dramatically’ as compared to other linguistic areas (e.g. de Bot, 1996;

Hulsen, 2000; Köpke & Nespoulous, 2001; Köpke & Schmid, 2004; Montrul, 2008; Opitz, 2011, etc. …)

LEXICAL ATTRITION

Aneta Pavlenko

• lower productivity on naming tasks

• lower accuracy/slower response times on naming tasks

• less sophisticated vocabulary in free speech

• more disfluencies in free speech

the spread of activation through the lexical network is less efficient!

LEXICAL ATTRITION (Jarvis, forthc., Schmid & Jarvis, 2014)

Scott Jarvis

• Speech Learning Model (SLM): the phonetic system remains adaptivethroughout the lifespan (development does not stop in puberty)

• language systems exist in a sharedphonological space and interact

• equivalence classification leads late bilinguals to “merge” phonetic categories (Flege 1987, MacKay et al.

2001)

• these mergers can be bi-directional

PHONETIC ATTRITION

James Emil Flege

• phonetic adaptation to the L2 and the development of a foreign accent are common (de Leeuw, Schmid & Mennen, 2010;

Hopp & Schmid, 2013; Bergmann, Nota & Schmid, 2017, …)

• phonotactic restructuring/perception of segmental phenomena susceptible to change (Cabrelli Amaro et al. 2017)

• perceptual sensitivity to phonological cues is shaped by the L2 (Dmitrieva 2017)

CURRENT WORK ON PHONETIC ATTRITION (PANEL AT ISB11, LIMERICK JUNE 2017)

top, ltr: M. Schmid, Jennifer Cabrelli Amaro, Esther de Leeuw, Chiara Celata, Rosalba Nodari, Marie Christin Himmel; bottom ltr: Charles Chang, Amber Nota, Olga Dmitrieva

• phonetic adaptation to the L2 and the development of a foreign accent are common (de Leeuw, Schmid & Mennen, 2010;

Hopp & Schmid, 2013; Bergmann, Nota & Schmid, 2017, …)

• phonotactic restructuring/perception of segmental phenomena susceptible to change (Cabrelli Amaro et al. 2017)

• perceptual sensitivity to phonological cues is shaped by the L2 (Dmitrieva 2017)

• whether the phonemic space can be re-structured is debatable (de Leeuw, Tusha & Schmid, 2017)

CURRENT WORK ON PHONETIC ATTRITION (PANEL AT ISB11, LIMERICK JUNE 2017)

Esther de Leeuw

• interpretation of overt/null pronouns differs between monolinguals and attriters (e.g. Gürel 2002; Tsimpli et al., 2005)

•overgeneralization of overt pronouns to contexts appropriate to null pro-nouns (Tsimpli et al., 2005; Domínguez, 2013 )

•problems with discourse-licensed but not syntax-licensed inversion (Perpiñán, 2011)

• problems with interpretation of tense/mood/aspect distinctions (Montrul, 2002)

GRAMMATICAL ATTRITION

Ayşe Gürel

Silvia Perpiñán

•other grammatical features, such as gender concord, appear extre-mely stable:

• in free speech, attriters make no more gender concord errors than controls (Schmid, 2014 )

• EEG responses to violations remainstable among late attriters

• ratings of grammaticality and off-linegender assignment are at ceiling(Bergmann et al., 2015; Seton et al., poster)


Christopher Bergmann

Bregtje Seton

•violations of verb agreement (finiteness, singular/plural) elicit a more-or-less native-like P600

•in addition, attriters have a central/posterior negativityin the N400-window (Bergmann et al.,

2015; Kasparian, Vespignani & Steinhauer, 2016)


Kristina Kasparian

Karsten Steinhauer

•adult learners and attriters have no problem with grammatical properties within any area (phonology, syntax, semantics)

•properties interfacing with one of these internal modules and language-external modules (pragmatics, dis-course) are problematic

INTERFACE HYPOTHESIS (Sorace 2005, 2011)

Antonella Sorace

GENERAL PERCEPTION OF ATTRITION

• attrition “is a special case of variation in the acquisition and use of a language” (Andersen, 1981)

• attrition occurs in “extreme situations of reduced L1 use” (Costa & Sebastián-Gallés, 2014)

in long-term immersed bilinguals (i.e., after decades) at very high levels of L2 proficiency

Albert Costa

L2

pro

ficie

ncy



hig

hlo

w

attrition zone

what (if anything)

happens to the L1 here?

• slower lexical access

• mergers at the lexical, phonetic and grammatical level

• L2 preferences occasionally override L1 preferences

• competition effects

• no wholesale erosion/underlying restructuring

EFFECTS OF THE L2 ON THE L1- LEXICAL ACCESS

• bilinguals are slower on lexical access/retrieval tasks in their L1 than monolinguals, effect is modu-lated by word frequency (‘weaker linkshypothesis’) (e.g., Gollan et al., 2005, 2008)

• bi-directional cognate facilitation effects in naming, word associationand lexical decision (Bice & Kroll, 2015; van Hell &

Dijkstra, 2002)

Tamar Gollan

Janet van Hell

EFFECTS OF THE L2 ON THE L1- LEXICAL ACCESS

• spoken word recognition and word naming are slower in bilinguals

• naming speed as well as the effect of phonological neighbourhood density and spelling-sound regularity are modulated L2 proficiency level(e.g., Botezatu, 2016; Bramer et al., 2017)

Roxana Botezatu

EFFECTS OF THE L2 ON THE L1 – READING

• bilinguals are more strongly affected by word frequency effects in L1 readingthan monolinguals

• decreased ease of processing and fluency and reduction of perceptualspan in L1 reading

• increased L2 experience modifies the earliest stages of L1 lexical access(Whitford & Titone, 2012, 2015)

Debra Titone

Veronica Whitford

EFFECTS OF THE L2 ON THE L1 - SYNTAX

• bilinguals have a single integrated lexicon, syntactic representations are shared between languages as far as possible, inte-

gration effects increase with L2 proficiency(e.g. Bernolet, Hartsuiker & Pickering, 2007, 2013; Hartsuiker, Pickering & Veltkamp, 2004; Sanoudaki & Thierry, 2015)

• optionality of interpretation shifts towards L2 preferences, e.g. in relative clause attach-

ment (e.g., Dussias, 2004; Dussias & Sagarra, 2007),

• low frequency constructions grammatical inL1 but ungrammatical in L2 may come to berejected at high L2 proficiency (Kasparian,

Vespignani & Steinhauer, 2016; Kasparian & Steinhauer, 2017)Giuli Dussias

Robert Hartsuiker

THE TIMECOURSE OF L2-TO-L1 EFFECTS

• phonetic adaptation can be detected after six weeks (Chang, 2012)

• L1 lexical retrieval is slower after six months (Baus, Costa & Carreiras 2013), naming can become faster in L2 than in L1 within three years (Frenck-Mestre 1993)

• relative clause attachment preferences change within 3 years of immersion (Dussias, 2004)

Charles Chang

L2-TO-L1 INFLUENCE AFFECTS ALL BILINGUALS

• “contrary to the claim that L2 affects L1 only when L2 speakers are highly proficient, L2 learning begins to impact L1 early in the development of the L2

skill.” (Bice & Kroll, 2015:966)

• shared neural support for processing two languages and fundamental permeability => this affects all bilinguals, but makes them different

from monolinguals (Kroll, Dussias, Bice & Perrotti, 2015)

• this discovery has fundamentally changed the way

we think about bilingualism (Kroll, Bobb & Hoshino, 2014; Kroll

et al., 2015)

Judith F. Kroll

• when two languages reside in the same mind, they invariably affect each other

• this bidirectional crosslinguistic interference can be seen at every linguistic level

• it is not necessarily a sign of erosion

BEYOND ‘EROSION’ AND ‘LOSS’

L2

pro

ficie

ncy



hig

hlo

w

non-attrition zone

attrition zone

• slower lexical access• competition effects• mergers at the lexical,

phonetic and grammatical level







what (if anything)

happens to the L1 here?

L2

pro

ficie

ncy



hig

hlo

w









non-attrition zone

attrition zone

THE IMPLICATIONS OF ‘ATTRITION’

• ‘erosion’ is a necessary defining property of attrition (but: the available evidence does not support the claim that mature L1 knowledge

is altered by co-activation) (Meisel, 2017)

• conventional boundaries of the term involve loss, we should distinguish temporary processing effects from more permanent loss of linguistic knowledge (Bardovi-Harlig & Stringer, 2017)

Jürgen Meisel

Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig

L2

pro

ficie

ncy



hig

hlo

w

non-attrition zone

attrition zone









we find the same things here and here

but we only call them ‘attrition’ if we find them

here!

THE IMPLICATIONS OF ‘ATTRITION’

• "It is high time that we as a field decide on a more accurate and more positive term for language differences across speakers that does not put emphasis on the apparent deficiency of bilingualism but rather highlights the increasingly evident reality that there is no one monolingual norm or clearly definable situation of ‘complete acquisition’” (Allen, 2017)

Shanley Allen

A DIFFERENT TERM THAN ‘ATTRITION’?

• this has been tried in the past:

• in 1982, Mike Sharwood Smith sug-gested ‘crosslinguistic interfluence’ to capture bidirectionality

• a Google Scholar search suggeststhat this is now used mainly for

• simultaneous bilingual development

• L3 development

• but not specifically for attrition

Mike Sharwood Smith

A DIFFERENT TERM THAN ‘ATTRITION’?

• this has been tried in the past:

• Viv Cook has proposed “effects of the second language on the first”

• unfortunately, this term has manypermutations/variants and so is notsearchable

• attempts to do so find far more instances of L1-to-L2 transfer than vice versa

Viv Cook

L2

pro

ficie

ncy



hig

hlo

w

non-attrition zone

attrition zone

titles of studies referenced in this talk

ATTRITION IS BEAUTIFUL!

• the term has provided cohesion to an emerging research field

• its conventionalized implications may not accurately reflect the developmental processes

• for researchers with experience in attrition research, this does not seem to pose a problem

• so it is probably just a matter of reaching a wider audience

CONCLUSION: THE OTHER SIDE OF BILINGUALISM

• when a previously monolingual speaker becomes bilingual, her L1 is immediately affected in multiple ways

• these effects fluctuate across time

• they are as real and as important as indicators of bilingual development and processing as anything we can see in the L2

bilingualism is not a one-way street!

let’s stop pretending it is!

CONCLUSION: THE OTHER SIDE OF BILINGUALISM

• these effects exist on a continuum

• any attempt at drawing a line through it, distinguishing attrition and non-attrition, is arbitrary and unhelpful

every bilingual is also an attriter!

THANK YOU!Monika S. Schmid

Centre for Research in Language Development throughout the Lifespan, University of Essex

languageattrition.org

languageattrition

@MonikaSSchmid

References:Allen, S. 2017. Comparison as a fruitful way forward: Bilinguals, co-activation, and interfaces. Linguistic Approaches

to Bilingualism 7(6).Andersen, R.W. 1982. Determining the linguistic attributes of language attrition. In R.D. Lambert and B.F. Freed (Eds.),

The Loss of Language Skills, (p. 83-117). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Bahrick, H. P. 1984. Fifty years of second language attrition: Implications for programmatic research. The Modern

Language Journal, 68(2), 105-118.Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Springer, D. 2017. Beyond steady-state models of ultimate attainment. Linguistic Approaches to

Bilingualism 7(2).Baus, C., Costa, A., & Carreiras, M. 2013. On the effects of second language immersion on first language production.

Acta Psychologica, 142(3), 402-409.Bergmann, C., Meulman, N., Stowe, L. A., Sprenger, S. A., & Schmid, M. S. (2015). Prolonged L2 immersion engenders

little change in morphosyntactic processing of bilingual natives. NeuroReport, 26(17), 1065-1070.Bergmann, C., Nota, A., Sprenger, S. A., & Schmid, M. S. 2016. L2 immersion causes non-native-like L1 pronunciation

in German attriters. Journal of Phonetics, 58, 71-86.Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. 2007. Shared syntactic representations in bilinguals: Evidence for the

role of word-order repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(5), 931.Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. 2013. From language-specific to shared syntactic representations: The

influence of second language proficiency on syntactic sharing in bilinguals. Cognition, 127(3), 287-306.Bice, K., & Kroll, J. F. 2015. Native language change during early stages of second language learning. NeuroReport,

26(16), 966.Botezatu, M. R. 2016. Second language fluency impacts spoken word recognition in the native language. Poster

presented at the International workshop on language production, La Colla, CA, July 25-27th 2016.Bramer, A., Ren, X., Henley, M., Ewy, R., Villar, C.M., Botezatu, R., & Kroll, J.F. 2017. Reduced sensitivity to L1-English

spelling-sound regularities early in L2 learning. Poster presented at ISB 11, Limerick, June 2017.Chang, C. B. 2012. Rapid and multifaceted effe cts of second-language learning on first-language speech production.

Journal of phonetics, 40(2), 249-268.Costa, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. 2014. How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain?. Nature Reviews

Neuroscience, 15(5), 336-345.De Bot, K.. 1996. Language loss. In Contact Linguistics. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Vol. I.,

H. Goebl, P.H. Nelde, Z. Stary and W. Wölck (eds), 579-585. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.De Leeuw, E., Schmid, M. S., & Mennen, I. 2010. The effects of contact on native language pronunciation in an L2

migrant setting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(1), 33-40.De Leeuw, E., Tusha, A., & Schmid, M. S. 2017. Individual phonological attrition in Albanian–English late bilinguals.

Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1-18.

Domínguez, L. 2013. Understanding Interfaces: Second language acquisition and first language attrition of Spanish subject realization and word order variation (Vol. 55). John Benjamins Publishing.

Dussias, P. E. 2004. Parsing a first language like a second: The erosion of L1 parsing strategies in Spanish-English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8(3), 355-371.

Flege, J. E. 1987. The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language: Evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of phonetics, 15(1), 47-65.

Flege, J. E., Schirru, C., & MacKay, I. R. 2003. Interaction between the native and second language phonetic subsystems. Speech communication, 40(4), 467-491.

Flores, C., Santos, A. L., Jesus, A., & Marques, R. 2017. Age and input effects in the acquisition of mood in Heritage Portuguese. Journal of child language, 44(4), 795-828.

Frenck-Mestre, C. 1993. Use of orthographic redundancies and word identification speed in bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(4), 397-409.

Gathercole, V. C. M., Thomas, E. M., Roberts, E., Hughes, C., & Hughes, E. K. 2013. Why assessment needs to take exposure into account: Vocabulary and grammatical abilities in bilingual children. Issues in the Assessment of Bilinguals, 20-55.

Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Cera, C., & Sandoval, T. C. 2008. More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of memory and language, 58(3), 787-814.

Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C. & Morris, S. K. 2005. Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory & Cognition, 33(7), 1220-1234.

Hartsuiker, R. J., Pickering, M. J., & Veltkamp, E. 2004. Is syntax separate or shared between languages? Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in Spanish-English bilinguals. Psychological Science, 15(6), 409-414.

Haugen, E. 1938. Language and immigration. Norwegian-American Studies, 10, 1.Hopp, H., & Schmid, M. S. 2013. Perceived foreign accent in first language attrition and second language acquisition:

The impact of age of acquisition and bilingualism. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34(2), 361-394.Hulsen, M. 2000. Language loss and language processing. Three generations of Dutch migrants in New Zealand.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit.Jarvis, S. forthc. Lexical attrition. In M.S. Schmid/B. Köpke (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Language Attrition. Oxford:

OUP.Kan, R. T. Y. in prep. Classifiers in Cantonese Heritage Language. PhD dissertation, University of Essex.Karayayla, T. submitted. Effects of first language attrition on heritage language input and ultimate attainment: two

generations of Turkish immigrants in the UKKasparian, K., & Steinhauer, K. 2017. When the second language takes the lead: Neurocognitive processing changes in

the first language of adult attriters. Frontiers in Psychology, 8.Kasparian, K., Vespignani, F., & Steinhauer, K. 2016. First-language attrition induces changes in online

morphosyntactic processing and re-analysis: An ERP study of number agreement in complex Italian sentences. Cognitive Science, 1-44.

Köpke, B. & J.-L. Nespoulous 2001. First language attrition in production skills and metalinguistic abilities in German-English and German-French bilinguals. In T. Ammerlaan, M. Hulsen, H. Strating & K. Yağmur (eds), Sociolinguistic and Psycholinguistic Perspectives on Maintenance and Loss of Minority Languages. Münster: Waxmann, 221-234.

Köpke, B. & Schmid, M. S. 2004. First language attrition: The next phase. In: M. S. Schmid, B. Köpke, M. Keijzer & L. Weilemar, L. (Eds), First Language Attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues (pp. 1-43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., & Hoshino, N. 2014. Two languages in mind: Bilingualism as a tool to investigate language, cognition, and the brain. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(3), 159-163.

Kroll, J. F., Dussias, P. E., Bice, K., & Perrotti, L. 2015. Bilingualism, mind, and brain. Annu. Rev. Linguist., 1(1), 377-394.

Kupisch, T., & Rothman, J. 2016. Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1367006916654355.

MacKay, I. R., Flege, J. E., Piske, T., & Schirru, C. 2001. Category restructuring during second-language speech acquisition. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110(1), 516-528.

MacWhinney, B. In press. Are these approaches incompatible? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism (2017)MacWhinney, B. forthc. Attrition and the Competition Model. In M. S. Schmid & B. Köpke (eds), The Oxford Handbook

of Language Attrition.Marian, V., & Spivey, M. 2003. Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within-and between-language

competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(2), 97-115.Meisel, J. 2017. On first language attrition in second language learners. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 7(6).Montrul, S. 2004. Convergent outcomes in L2 acquisition and L1 loss. In M. S. Schmid, B. Köpke, M. Keijzer & L.

Weilemar (Eds.), First Language Attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues, (pp. 259-279) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Montrul, S. A. 2008. Incomplete acquisition in bilingualism: Re-examining the age factor (Vol. 39). John Benjamins Publishing.

Montrul, S. 2017. Developmental continuity in morphosyntactic attrition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 7(6).Opitz, C. 2011. First language attrition and second language acquisition in a second language environment (Doctoral

dissertation, Trinity College Dublin).Pavlenko, A. 2004. L2 influence and L1 attrition in adult bilingualism. In M. S. Schmid, B. Köpke, M. Keijzer & L.

Weilemar (Eds.), First Language Attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues, (pp. 47-59) Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Perpiñán, S. 2011. Optionality in bilingual native grammars. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 2(2), 312-341.Rothman, J. 2009. Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage

languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 155-163.Sanoudaki, E., & Thierry, G. 2015. Language non-selective syntactic activation in early bilinguals: the role of verbal

fluency. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(5), 548-560.

Schmid, M. S., & Jarvis, S. 2014. Lexical access and lexical diversity in first language attrition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(4), 729-748.

Schmid, MS 2002. First Language Attrition, Use, And Maintenance: The Case of German Jews in Anglophone Countries. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Schmid, M.S. 2004 First language attrition: the methodology revised. International Journal of Bilingualism 8(3): 239-255.

Schmid, M.S. 2013 First language attrition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 3(1), 97-116.Schmid, M.S. 2014 The debate on maturational constraints in bilingual development: a perspective from first language

attrition. Language acquisition 21(4), 386-410.Schmid, M. S. & Köpke, B. in press. The relevance of first language attrition to theories of bilingual development.

Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 2017. Schmitt, E. 2004. No more reductions – To the problem of evaluation of language attrition data. In M. S. Schmid, B.

Köpke, M. Keijzer & L. Weilemar (eds.), First language attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues, pp. 299-316. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Schmitt, E. 2010. When boundaries are crossed: Evaluating language attrition data from two perspectives. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13(1): 13 : 63-72

Schmitt, E. 2016. The role of L1 literacy in language maintenance among immigrant adolescents. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Language Attrition, Colchester, UK, July 2016.

Seliger, H. W., & Vago, R. M. 1991. The study of first language attrition: An overview. In First Language Attrition, H.W. Seliger and R.M. Vago (eds), 3-15 Cambride: CUP.

Sharwood Smith, M.A. 1983a. On explaining language loss. In Language development at the crossroads, S. Felix and H. Wode (eds), 49-69. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.

Sharwood Smith, M.A. 1983b. On first language loss in the second language acquirer: Problems of transfer. In Language transfer in language learning, S. Gass and L. Selinker (eds), 222-231. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Sharwood Smith, M.A. 1989. Crosslinguistic influence in language loss. In Bilingualism Across the Lifespan, K. Hyltenstam and L.K. Obler (eds), 185-201. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sharwood Smith, M.A. and van Buren, P. 1991. First language attrition and the parameter setting model. In First Language Attrition, H.W. Seliger and R.M. Vago (eds), 17-30. Cambridge: CUP.

Sorace, A. 2005. Selective optionality in language development. In L. Cornips and K. P. Corrigan (eds.), Syntax and variation. Reconciling the biological and the social (p. 55-80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Sorace, A. 2011. Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Ling. approaches to bilingualism 1(1), 1-33.Tsimpli, I., Sorace, A., Heycock, C., & Filiaci, F. 2004. First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek

and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8(3), 257-277.Unsworth, S. 2013. Assessing the role of current and cumulative exposure in simultaneous bilingual acquisition: The

case of Dutch gender. Bilingualism: Language and cognition, 16(1), 86-110.

Van Hell, J., & Dijkstra, T. 2002. Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native

contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9:4, 780-789.

Weltens, B. 1988. The attrition of French as a foreign language. Dordrecht: Foris.

Whitford, V., & Titone, D. 2012. Second-language experience modulates first-and second-language word frequency effects:

Evidence from eye movement measures of natural paragraph reading. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 19(1), 73-80.

Whitford, V., & Titone, D. 2015. Second-language experience modulates eye movements during first-and second-language

sentence reading: evidence from a gaze-contingent moving window paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,

Memory, and Cognition, 41(4), 1118.

when is a bilingual an attriter? bilingualism as a two...

Documents