In:Bilingualism: A framework for understanding the mental lexicon
Edited by Maya Libben, Mira Goral and Gary Libben †
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 6] 2017
► pp. 7–26
Languages without borders
Reframing the study of the bilingual mental lexicon
Published online: 20 December 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.6.01vai
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.6.01vai
What might the study of language processing look like if the canonical language user were assumed to be bilingual? In this chapter we offer some reflections on how the origins, assumptions and practices of psycholinguistics constructed a particular view of language and of the typical language user, with distinct consequences for the construction of bilingualism as an object of inquiry. We suggest that if psycholinguistics is to fully embrace its “bilingual turn” it will benefit from exploring new ways of conceptualizing and approaching the study of bilingual language processing rather than uncritically adopting questions and approaches that were initially framed to understand single language use. Specifically, we suggest that research designs that allow language phenomena to emerge, rather than be expressly manipulated or restricted by researchers’ preconceived assumptions and that build in a broader range of variables and consider an expanded range of bilingual groups, will advance our understanding of the bilingual mental lexicon in important ways.
Article outline
- 1.Metaphors of bilingual abilities
- 2.Some predictions
- 3.Evidence related to prediction on research settings
- 4.Evidence related to prediction on characterization of bilinguals
- 5.Evidence related to prediction on group comparisons
- 6.Evidence related to predictions on bilingual forms of language use
- 6.1Code-switching
- 6.2Language mode
- 7.Towards a bilingual focus in research on bilingualism
- 8.Some recommendations
- 8.1Variability in language experience as informative
- 8.2Deconstructing linguistic competence – the impact of modality
- 8.3When does language as a category matter?
- 8.4Foregrounding conversational contexts
- 8.5Bringing identity into the picture
- 9.Conclusion: Why rethinking the study of bilingualism matters
- Author note
References
References (64)
Altarriba, J. (2003). Does carino equal “liking”? A theoretical approach to conceptual nonequivalence between languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7(3), 305–322.
Barrett, R. (2014). The emergence of the unmarked: Queer theory, language ideology, and formal linguistics. In L. Zimman, J. Davis, & J. Raclaw (Eds.), Queer excursions: Retheorizing binaries in language, gender, and sexuality (pp. 195–223). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bassetti, B., Vaid, J., & Cook, V. (2012). Interdisciplinary approaches to second language writing systems. Writing Systems Research, 4(1), 1–7.
Baum, S., & Titone, D. (2014). Moving toward a neuroplasticity view of bilingualism, executive control, and aging. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(5), 857–894.
Bialystok, E., Craik, F., & Luk, G. (2012). Bilingualism: Consequences for mind and brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(4), 240–250.
Block, D. (2007). Bilingualism: Four assumptions and four responses. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 66–82.
Blommaert, J., & Backus, A. (2012). Superdiverse repertoires and the individual. In I. de Saint-Jacques & J. G. Weber (Eds.), Multimodality and multilingualism. Dordrecht: Springer.
Brysbaert, M., Verreyt, N., & Duyck, W. (2010). Models as hypothesis generators and models as roadmaps. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(3), 383–384.
Bucholtz, M. (1995). From Mulatta to Mestiza: Passing and the linguistic reshaping of ethnic identity. In K. Hall & M. Bucholtz (Eds.), Gender articulated: Language and the socially constructed self (pp. 351–374). New York, NY: Routledge.
Caldwell-Harris, C. (2014). Emotionality differences between a native and foreign language: Theoretical implications. Frontiers in Psychology, 5.
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). How native-like is non-native language processing? Trends in Cognitive Science, 10, 564–570.
Cook, V. (1991). The poverty of stimulus argument and multicompetence. Second Language Research, 7(2), 103–117.
. (2016). Premises of multicompetence. In V. Cook & L. Wei (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multicompetence (pp. 1–25). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cook, V., & Bassetti, B. (Eds.). (2011). Language and bilingual cognition. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Costa, A., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2014). How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain? Nature Neuroscience Reviews, 15, 336–345.
Cruz-Ferreira, M. (2011). The effects of monolingualism. Being multilingual. July 2, 2011 blog entry. <[URL]>
Dal Maso, S., & Giraudo, H. (2014). Morphological processing in L2 Italian: Evidence from a masked priming study. In Special issue Morphology and its interfaces: Syntax, semantics and the lexicon
. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 37(2), 322–337.
De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A Dynamic Systems Theory approach to language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 7–21.
De Groot, A. (2011). Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilinguals: An introduction. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(3), 175–197.
Garcia, O., & Kleyn, T. (2016). Translanguaging theory in education. In O. Garcia & T. Kleyn (Eds.), Translanguaging with multilingual students: Learning from classroom moments (pp. 9–33). New York, NY: Routledge.
Genesee, F. (2014). Commentary on “Moving toward a neuroplasticity view of bilingualism”: The early years. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(5), 905–909.
Green, D. (2011). Language control in different contexts: The behavioral ecology of bilingual speakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1–4.
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 36(1), 3–15.
Gulberg, M. (2010). Methodological reflections on gesture analysis in second language acquisition and bilingualism. Second Language Research, 26(1), 75–102.
Hall, C. J. (2013). Cognitive contributions to plurilithic views of English and other languages. Applied Linguistics, 34(2), 211–231.
Hartanto, A., & Yang, H. (2016). Disparate bilingual experiences modulate task switching advantages: A diffusion-model analysis of the effects of interactional context on switch costs. Cognition, 150, 10–19.
Herdina, P., & Jessner, U. (2002). A dynamic model of multilingualism. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Huettig, F. (2015). Literacy influences cognitive abilities far beyond the mastery of written language. In I. van de Craats, J. Kurvers, & R. van Hout (Eds.), Adult literacy, second language, and cognition. LESLLA Proceedings 2014. Nijmegen: Center for Language Studies.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & H. Janet (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269–293). London: Penguin.
Isurin, L., & Ivanova-Sullivan, T. (2008). Lost in between: The case of Russian heritage speakers. Heritage Language Journal, 6(1), 72–104.
Jenkins, J. (2006). Points of view and blind spots: ELF and SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(2), 137–162.
Kharkhurin, A. (2015). Bilingualism and creativity. In W. Wright, S. Boun, & O. Garcia (Eds.), The handbook of bilingual and multilingual education (pp. 38–55). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kroll, J. F., Dussias, P. E., Bogulski, C. A., & Valdes-Kroff, J. (2012). Juggling two languages in one mind: What bilinguals tell us about language processing and its consequences for cognition. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 229–262). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lagrou, E., Hartsuiker, R., & Duyck, W. (2013). The influence of sentence context and accented speech on lexical access in second-language auditory word recognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(3), 508–517.
Lambert, W. E. (1972). Language, psychology, and culture: Essays by Wallace E. Lambert. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Ludi, G., & Py, B. (2009). To be or not to be … a plurilingual speaker. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(2), 154–167.
Mägiste, E. (1979). The competing language systems of the multilingual: A developmental study of decoding and encoding processes. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 79–89.
May, S. (2014). Disciplinary divides, knowledge construction, and the multilingual turn. In S. May (Ed.), The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and bilingual education (pp. 7–31). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
Ng, S., & Wicha, N. Y. (2013). Meaning first: A case for language-independent access to word meaning in the bilingual brain. Neuropsychologia, 51(5), 850–863.
Ortega, L. (2016). Multi-competence in second language acquisition: Inroads into the mainstream? In V. Cook & L. Wei (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multicompetence (pp. 50–76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pavlenko, A. (2014). The bilingual mind and what it tells us about language and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pika, S., Nicoladis, E., & Marentette, P. (2006). A cross-cultural study on the use of gestures: Evidence for cross-linguistic transfer? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(3), 319–327.
Preston, D. (2011). Methods in (applied) folk linguistics: Getting into the minds of the folk. AILA Review, 24, 15–39.
Rao, C., Vaid, J., Srinivasan, N., & Chen, H. C. (2011). Orthographic characteristics speed Hindi word naming but slow Urdu naming: Evidence from Hindi-Urdu biliterates. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 24, 679–695.
Singh, L., & Fu, C. S.-L. (2016). A new view of language development: The acquisition of lexical tone. Child Development.
Spivey, M. J., & Marian, V. (1999). Cross talk between native and second languages: Partial activation of an irrelevant lexicon. Psychological Science, 10, 281–284.
Sridhar, S. N., & Sridhar, K. (1980). The syntax and psycholinguistics of code-mixing. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34(4), 407–416.
Tosun, S., Vaid, J., & Geraci, L. (2013). Does obligatory linguistic marking of source of evidence affect source memory? A Turkish/English investigation. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(2), 121–134.
Urciuoli, B. (1996/2013). Exposing prejudice: Puerto Rican experiences of language, race, and class. Longrove, IL: Waveland Press.
Vaid, J. (2011). Asymmetries in representational drawing: Alternatives to a laterality account. In T. Schubert & A. Maass (Eds.), Spatial dimensions of social thought (pp. 231–255). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Vaid, J., & Chengappa, S. (1988). Assigning linguistic roles: Sentence interpretation in normal and aphasic Kannada-English bilinguals. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 3(2), 161–183.
Vaid, J., Lopez, B., & Martinez, F. (2015). Linking the figurative to the creative: Bilinguals’ comprehension of metaphors, jokes, and remote associates. In R. R. Heredia & A. Cieslicka (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 53–86). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vaid, J., & Meuter, R. (2016). Not through a glass darkly: Refocusing the study of bilingualism through a ‘bivocal’ lens. In V. Cook & L. Wei (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multicompetence (pp. 77–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vasanta, D. (2011). Verbs of motion and language use: Reflections on research frameworks. In R. Mishra & N. Srinivasan (Eds.), Language and cognition interface: State of the art (pp. 158–179). Munich: Lincom.
Yildiz, Y. (2013). Beyond the mother tongue: The postmonolingual condition. New York, NY: Fordham University Press.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Febre, Karina, Nafiseh Faghihi & Jyotsna Vaid
Chalikia, Magdalene H., Jyotsna Vaid & Natsuka Kobayashi
De Houwer, Annick
Titone, Debra A. & Mehrgol Tiv
Libben, Gary
Vaid, Jyotsna
Tiv, Mehrgol, Elisabeth O’Regan & Debra Titone
Filipović, Luna
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
