When A Nonnative Accent Lets You Spot All the Errors: Examining the Syntactic Interlanguage Benefit.

In our continuously globalizing world, cross-cultural and cross-linguistic communications are far from exceptional. A wealth of research has indicated that the processing of nonnative-accented speech can be challenging for native listeners, both at the level of phonology. However, few online studies have examined the underpinnings of accented speech recognition from the perspective of the nonnative listener, even though behavioral studies indicate that accented input may be easier to process for such individuals (i.e., the interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit. The current EEG study first examined the phonological and syntactic analysis of nonnative-accented speech among nonnative listeners. As such, 30 English learners of Spanish listened to syntactically correct and incorrect Spanish sentences produced in native and nonnative-accented Spanish. The violation in the incorrect sentences was caused by errors that are typical (i.e., gender errors; *la color) or atypical (i.e., number errors; *los color) for English learners of Spanish. Results indicated that nonnative listeners elicit a phonological mismatch negativity (PMN) when attending to speech produced by a native Spanish speaker. Furthermore, the nonnative listeners showed a P600 for all grammatical violations, indicating that they repair all errors regardless of their typicality or the accent in which they are produced. Follow-up analyses compared our novel data to the data of native listeners from the methodologically identical precursor study. These analyses showed that native and nonnative listeners exhibit directionally opposite PMN effects; whereas natives exhibited a larger PMN for English-accented Spanish, nonnatives displayed a larger PMN in response to native Spanish utterances (a classic interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit). An additional difference was observed at the syntactic level: Whereas natives repaired only atypical number errors when they were English-accented, nonnative participants exhibited a P600 in response to all English-accented syntactic errors, regardless of their typicality (a syntactic interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit). Altogether, these results suggest that accented speech is not inherently difficult to process; in fact, nonnatives may benefit from the presence of a nonnative accent. Thus, our data provide some of the first electrophysiological evidence supporting the existence of the classic interlanguage speech intelligibility benefit and its novel syntactic counterpart.

Language athletes: Dual-language code-switchers exhibit inhibitory control advantages.

Recent studies have begun to examine bilingual cognition from more nuanced, experienced-based perspectives. The present study adds to this body of work by investigating the potential impact of code-switching on bilinguals' inhibitory control abilities. Crucially, our bilingual participants originated from a predominantly dual-language environment, the interactional context which is believed to require (and therefore, potentially train) cognitive control processes related to goal-monitoring and inhibition. As such, 266 French Canadian bilinguals completed an online experiment wherein they were asked to complete a domain-general (Flanker) and a language-specific (bilingual Stroop) inhibitory control task, as well as extensive demographic and language background questionnaires. Stepwise multiple regressions (including various potential demographic and linguistic predictors) were conducted on the participants' Flanker and Stroop effects. The results indicated that the bilinguals' propensity to code-switch consistently yielded significant positive (but unidirectional) inhibitory control effects: dual-language bilinguals who reported more habitual French-to-English switching exhibited better goal-monitoring and inhibition abilities. For the language-specific task, the analysis also revealed that frequent unintentional code-switching may mitigate these inhibition skills. As such, the findings demonstrate that dual-language code-switchers may experience inhibitory control benefits, but only when their switching is self-reportedly deliberate. We conclude that the bilinguals' interactional context is thus of primary importance, as the dual-language context is more conducive to intentional code-switching. Overall, the current study highlights the importance of considering individualistic language experience when it comes to examining potential bilingual executive functioning advantages.

Lexical-semantic processing costs are not inherent to intra-sentential code-switching: The role of switching habits.

A bank of past electrophysiological research suggests that code-switching (i.e., the use of multiple languages during a single conversational event) is characterized by increased processing costs. However, the majority of these studies tested bilinguals who did not necessarily code-switch on a regular basis. In order to investigate the impact of switching habits on language processing, two groups of French-English bilinguals (habitual code-switchers and non-habitual code-switchers) read sentences containing unilingual and switched determiner phrases while their EEG was recorded. The findings indicate important processing differences between the groups. Notably, switched trials (particularly those with a French determiner) generated an increased negativity from 300 to 500 ms for non-habitual code-switchers, but not for habitual code-switchers. The veritable impact of switching habits were also supported by a correlation analysis. This finding suggests that code-switching is not inherently effortful to process, but rather, that comprehension costs are related to idiosyncratic factors, such as the extent of prior exposure to code-switched input. An LPC was also observed from 500 to 900 for habitual code-switchers; for non-habitual switchers, this effect may have been attenuated by the long-lasting N400 effect. We advance several possible interpretations for the late positivity. Altogether, the results from the current study support the claim that the code-switching cost observed in previous literature may be linked to the bilingual samples tested in those studies: habitual code-switchers may not find switches effortful to process, but not all bilinguals code-switch. We highlight the importance of experience and individual differences in the study of bilingual cognition.