
pmid: 26271503
AbstractThe cognitive and linguistic processes involved in the acquisition and use of two languages are systematically different from those processes engaged in monolingual language use, leading to detectable changes in language and cognitive outcomes for bilinguals. The present article describes these differences and offers speculation on possible mechanisms. Measures of linguistic proficiency and processing are often poorer in bilinguals than in monolinguals: bilingual children have a smaller vocabulary in each language than comparable monolingual children in that language and bilingual adults take longer to retrieve specific words than monolinguals. In contrast, measures of nonverbal executive control, including the ability to selectively attend to relevant information, inhibit distraction, and shift between tasks is generally better in bilinguals than in monolinguals. These two types of outcomes are illustrated and explained through behavioral and neuroimaging evidence. The implications of these effects of bilingualism on cognitive and linguistic processing are considered in terms of both their clinical and theoretical consequences. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.This article is categorized under: Linguistics > Language in Mind and Brain Psychology > Language
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 69 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
