This study mapped the trajectory of developing derivational morphological knowledge in Hebrew monolingual and Russian–Hebrew bilingual children. We investigated 2nd and 4th graders, using a two-by-two structure along the dimensions of modality (comprehension, production) and type of word (real-word, pseudo-word). Performance in the morphological analogies comprehension tasks improved with grade, and monolingual and bilingual children performed equally well. A different pattern was evident in production tasks. In real-word production, monolingual children were more accurate than bilingual children, but this group difference narrowed with age. In pseudo-word production, monolingual children used more morphological elements than bilingual children, and there was also a tendency towards group differences narrowing with age. Detailed error analyses across all tasks revealed that monolingual children recruited more morphological elements than bilingual children. We present implications for assessment of morphological knowledge, and suggest that morphological intervention is a promising avenue for promoting bilingual children’s success.

Rhetorical questions (RhQs) are a complex phenomenon at the interface of pragmatics, prosody and syntax, which requires reasoning on intentions and goals, and which involves a mismatch between literal and intended meaning. In Italian, RhQs can be marked by optional particles and verbal morphology. We investigated when children aged 6-9 acquire the relevant patterns of optional modification and exploit them in the appropriate pragmatic context. In an elicited production study with 84 monolingual and 88 Italian–German bilingual children, we found that development in monolinguals was determined by age with a progression between 6 and 9 years, while bilingual development was influenced by proficiency in the heritage language and dominance more generally. These results are in line with Tsimpli's (2014) proposal that “very-late-acquired phenomena”, especially interface domains, depend on their timing in acquisition. Unlike for other pragmatic phenomena, such as irony and conversational competence, there was no evidence for a bilingual advantage.

The vocabulary of bilingual children is determined by various linguistic factors that develop depending on the language input and individual factors of these children. To understand vocabulary development and to be able to support these children accordingly, the assessment instruments essentially need to be adapted to this individual process. The current study examined factors influencing productive vocabulary performance by means of explanatory item-response models on a sample of 126 German monolingual and Turkish—German bilingual preschool children aged between 3 and 6 years. We analyzed item features with respect to lexical category, length, frequency, age of acquisition, and complexity in dependence of the language background of the children. Apart from a general delay in the development and some language specific characteristics, the results indicate a parallel shifted acquisition of vocabulary in bilingual children, which is nonetheless shaped by the same factors as in monolinguals.

Much research has documented that second language (L2) development of tense and aspect markers is influenced by a range of factors that include cross-linguistic influences, phonological nature of forms, inherent semantics of predicates, and discourse structure. Nonetheless, relatively little research has examined the role of discourse organization in the development of tense and aspect marking. To expand our understanding of L2 tense and aspect, this study examined child L2 development of English tense and aspect in oral narratives in relation to the foregrounding and backgrounding of narrative discourse. Thirty-eight learners’ oral narratives were elicited, using Frog, Where Are You? (Mayer, 1969) three points in time: kindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2. The foreground in oral narratives was associated with more frequent use of the simple past than the background across the grade levels. While the occurrence of the simple past did not necessarily mark the foreground, the simple past emerged as the dominant form in the foreground in Grade 1. In the background, on the other hand, it took longer for the past forms to catch up with the non-past forms. The simple past became dominant in the background in Grade 2.

To assess the presence of cross-linguistic influence, this study compared the processing of Dutch sentences by English–Dutch and German–Dutch bilingual and Dutch monolingual children in a self-paced listening task. We combined insights from studies on child bilingualism and adult second language acquisition. Sentence structures showing partial overlap between languages were investigated (long passives), as well as structures with complete or no overlap (verb second and verb third sentences). We found evidence for syntactic co-activation of overlapping structures in the form of inhibition during listening. Syntactic, and possibly lexical, overlap between languages, and language dominance modulated effects. In particular, online cross-linguistic influence was visible only in the German–Dutch group. Furthermore, effects were most pronounced when structures partially overlapped and were absent in non-overlapping structures. Effects of online cross-linguistic influence became stronger the more German-dominant children were. Our results indicate that syntactic co-activation across languages affects sentence processing in bilingual children.

Although cross-linguistic influence at the level of morphosyntax is one of the most intensively studied topics in child bilingualism, the circumstances under which it occurs remain unclear. In this meta-analysis, we measured the effect size of cross-linguistic influence and systematically assessed its predictors in 750 simultaneous and early sequential bilingual children in 17 unique language combinations across 26 experimental studies. We found a significant small to moderate average effect size of cross-linguistic influence, indicating that cross-linguistic influence is part and parcel of bilingual development. Language dominance, operationalized as societal language, was a significant predictor of cross-linguistic influence, whereas surface overlap, language domain and age were not. Perhaps an even more important finding was that definitions and operationalisations of cross-linguistic influence and its predictors varied considerably between studies. This could explain the absence of a comprehensive theory in the field. To solve this issue, we argue for a more uniform method of studying cross-linguistic influence.

This study examined the linguistic and individual-level factors that render case marking a vulnerable domain in English-dominant Greek heritage children. We also investigated whether heritage language (HL) children can use case-marking cues to interpret (non-)canonical sentences in Greek similarly to their monolingual peers. A group of six- to twelve-year-old Greek heritage children in New York City and a control group of age-matched monolingual children living in Greece participated in a production and a picture verification task targeting case marking and (non-)canonical word order in Greek. HL children produced syncretic inflectional errors, also found in preschool monolingual children. In the comprehension task, HL children showed variable performance on the non-canonical OVS but ceiling performance on the SVO conditions, which suggests influence from English. Linguistic factors such as case transparency affected comprehension, whereas child-level factors such as proficiency and degree of (early) use of Greek influenced performance on both modalities.

Immigrant children in Denmark differ greatly in educational outcomes. This study examined whether systematic differences in majority language (L2) and preliteracy skills are apparent already at ages 2–6 in immigrant children in Denmark across regional immigration background. Danish language and preliteracy skills in 1,211 immigrant children in four regional groups (based on maternal origin) and 11,259 native Danish nonimmigrant children, all enrolled in Danish childcare centers, were assessed using an age- and gender-normed language assessment instrument. Hierarchical linear models showed that all four immigrant groups scored significantly lower than the native Danish group; the negative coefficients diminished but remained significant when socioeconomic background and having a native Danish father were controlled for. In addition, even with these controls, significant differences existed between some of the immigrant groups, suggesting that factors relating to regional immigrant background were important sources of differences in L2 development. A greater immigrant disadvantage for language than preliteracy skills was found; two immigrant groups did not differ significantly from the nonimmigrant Danish group for preliteracy skills. The results suggest that measures to reduce inequalities in long-term educational achievement between immigrant groups should be taken already before school with a particular focus on L2 language skills.

We investigated the speech patterns and accentedness of Polish–English bilingual children raised in Great Britain to verify whether their L1 Polish would be perceived as different from that of monolinguals matched for age and socioeconomic status. To this end, Polish-language speech samples of 32 bilinguals and 10 monolinguals (a 3:1 ratio, MAge = 5.79) were phonetically analysed by trained phoneticians and rated by 55 Polish raters, who assessed the degree of native accent, intelligibility, acceptability and perceived age. The results show significant differences in the phonetic performance of bilingual and monolingual children – both in terms of atypical speech patterns uncovered in the phonetic analysis and in terms of the holistic accentedness ratings. We also explored the socio-linguistic predictors of accent ratings in bilingual speech and found that the amount of L1 Polish input was the main predictor of accentedness in children's L1 Polish speech, while L2 English input was marginally significant. (149)

Before bilingual children can say anything, they must learn to distinguish between the two languages that are spoken to them, and they must learn to make useful perceptual distinctions in each of them in order to understand what is said to them. Conversational interaction and non-verbal communication, such as pointing and gaze, aid children in attending to and processing aspects of their “language input environment” (De Houwer, 2009, 2011), “exposure” in Carroll's terms. As Carroll points out, children must build up their linguistic categories based on their intrinsically category-free “exposure”: they must process speech to acquire language. This reminds me of Wijnen's (2000) notion of language intake, which is the “data base children use to derive hypotheses on the structure of the target grammar” (p. 174), and which constitutes children's selection from what I will continue to call input, pace Carroll.

Bilingual children have long been held to have ‘separate linguistic systems’ from the start (e.g., Meisel, 2001). This paper challenges that assumption with data from five bilingual children's first 100 words. Whereas the prosodic structures represented by a child's words may or may not be differentiated by language, emergent phonological templates are not, the same patterns being deployed as more complex adult word forms are targeted in each language. Reliance on common (idiosyncratic) phonological templates for the two languages is ascribed to children's experience with their own voice (in production) as well as with others’ speech. Both experimental studies and spontaneous cross-linguistic speech errors in adults and older children are cited to support the view that, for a bilingual, unconscious processing draws on both languages throughout the lifespan, which suggests that the emphasis on ‘separate systems’ (from the start or thereafter) may be misconceived.

The present study investigates the influence of word category on naming performance in two populations: bilingual and monolingual children. The question is whether and, if so, to what extent monolingual and bilingual children differ with respect to noun and verb naming and whether a noun bias exists in the lexical abilities of bilingual children. Picture naming of objects and actions by Russian–German bilingual children (aged 4–7 years) was compared to age-matched monolingual children. The results clearly demonstrate a naming deficit of bilingual children in comparison to monolingual children that increases with age. Noun learning is more fragile in bilingual contexts than is verb learning. In bilingual language acquisition, nouns do not predominate over verbs as much as is seen in monolingual German and Russian children. The results are discussed with respect to semantic-conceptual aspects and language-specific features of nouns and verbs, and the impact of input on the acquisition of these word categories.

The relation between language proficiency and executive functions has been established for monolingual children. The present study addresses this issue in bilingual children, comparing the language proficiency of sequential English–Hebrew bilingual preschool children as determined by standardized assessment instruments and generic executive control in inhibition, sorting and shifting tasks. Participants were recruited from regular and language preschools and classified according to their language proficiency as bilinguals with high language proficiency in at least one of their languages (including balanced bilinguals with high language proficiency in both languages, L2-dominant, and L1-dominant) and bilinguals showing low language proficiency in both languages. As reported for monolingual preschool children, positive relationships between language proficiency and inhibition and shifting abilities were found, with significantly lower performance among low language proficiency bilinguals. Significantly better performance was also found for shifting among children who had already mastered their L2 compared to those who were still in the process of acquiring the new language.

Longitudinal word learning studies which control for experience can advance understanding of language learning and potential intra- and inter-language relationships in developing bilinguals. We examined novel word learning in both the first (L1) and the second (L2) languages of bilingual children. The rate and shape of change as well as the role of existing vocabulary in new word learning were of primary interest. Participants were 32 three-to-five-year old children. All participants had Hmong as their L1 and English as their L2. A novel word learning paradigm was used to measure children's acquisition of new form–meaning associations in L1 and L2 over eight weekly training sessions (four in each language). Two-level hierarchical linear models were used to analyze change in the comprehension and production of new words in Hmong and English over time. Results showed that there were comparable linear gains in novel word comprehension and production in both the L1 and the L2, despite different starting points. Success in novel word learning was predicted to some extent by existing vocabulary knowledge within each language. Between-language relationships were both positive and negative. These findings are consistent with highly interactive dynamic theories of sequential bilingual language learning.