Volume 9, Issue 4-5
  • ISSN 1879-9264
  • E-ISSN: 1879-9272
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



We investigate reference production in bilingual children. Based on Kibrik (2011), we analyze the production of referring expressions in discourse in terms of activation of a referent. We propose a novel approach, which calculates activation by taking into account different activation-lending factors and their respective weight. This allows us to compare the activation encoded by referring expressions across languages and groups of speakers, and to run correlational analyses with the speakers’ cognitive profiles. In particular, the study addresses the correlation between activation and lexical processing among bilinguals, based on the distribution of referring expressions in narratives by 20 German-Greek bilingual children, compared to their monolingual peers. We found that bilingual pronouns correspond to a lower activation than monolingual ones. Speed of lexical retrieval is a predictor of the bilingual performance. Our model of analysis accounts for how reference production varies across individuals and which cognitive mechanisms underlie this variation.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Almor, A.
    (1999) Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106(4), 748–765. 10.1037/0033‑295X.106.4.748
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.748 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andreou, M., Knopp, E., Bongartz, C., & Tsimpli, I.
    (2015) Character reference in Greek-German bilingual children’s narratives. InL. Roberts (Ed.), EUROSLA Yearbook16. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/eurosla.15.01and
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.15.01and [Google Scholar]
  3. Ariel, M.
    (1990) Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Arnold, J.
    (2010) How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. Language and Linguistic Compass, 4(4), 187–203. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2010.00193.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00193.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Bates, E., & Goodman, J. C.
    (1997) On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon: Evidence from acquisition, aphasia, and real-time processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 507–584. 10.1080/016909697386628
    https://doi.org/10.1080/016909697386628 [Google Scholar]
  6. Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A.
    (2007) Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689. 10.1007/s11049‑007‑9026‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-007-9026-9 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G.
    (2008) Cognitive control and lexical access in younger and older bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 859–873.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K., & Yang, S.
    (2010) Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(2), 397–401. 10.1017/S136672891100040X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672891100040X [Google Scholar]
  9. Bittner, D., & Kuehnast, M.
    (2012) Comprehension of intersentential pronouns in child German and child Bulgarian. First Language, 32(1–2), 176–204. 10.1177/0142723711403074
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723711403074 [Google Scholar]
  10. Blumenfeld, H. H., & Marian, V.
    (2007) Constraints on parallel activation in bilingual spoken language processing: Examining proficiency and lexical status using eye-tracking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(5), 633–660. 10.1080/01690960601000746
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960601000746 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bosch, P., Rozario, T., & Zhao, Y.
    (2003) Demonstrative pronouns and personal pronouns. German der vs. er. In: Proceedings of the EACL2003. Budapest. Workshop on The Computational Treatment of Anaphora.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bongartz, C., & Torregrossa, J.
    (2017) The effects of balanced biliteracy on Greek-German bilingual children’s secondary discourse ability. Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2017.1355888
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1355888 [Google Scholar]
  13. Burzio, L.
    (1998) Anaphora and soft constraints. InP. Barbosa, D. Fox, P. Hagstrom, M. McGinnis & D. Pesetsky (Eds.), Is the best good enough? Optimality and competition in syntax (pp.93–114). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Carminati, M. N.
    (2002) The processing of Italian subject pronouns. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  15. De Cat, C., & Serratrice, L.
    (submitted). Predicting language proficiency in bilingual children. Retrieved fromosf.io/wkgv7on21.03.2017. 10.31219/osf.io/f5q98
  16. Diessel, H.
    (1999) Demonstratives. Form, function, and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.42
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.42 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & Van Heuven, W. J. B.
    (1999) Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 496–518. 10.1006/jmla.1999.2654
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1999.2654 [Google Scholar]
  18. Dimitriadis, A.
    (1995) When pro-drop languages don’t: On overt pronominal subjects in Greek. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 2(2), 45–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Duyck, W., Vanderelst, D., Desmet, T., & Hartsuiker, R. J.
    (2008) The frequency effect in second-language visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15(4), 850–855. 10.3758/PBR.15.4.850
    https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.4.850 [Google Scholar]
  20. Ferrand, L., & New, B.
    (2003) Syllabic length effects in visual word recognition and naming. Acta Psychologica, 113, 167–183. 10.1016/S0001‑6918(03)00031‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(03)00031-3 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gagarina, N.
    (2016) Narratives of Russian-German preschool and primary school bilinguals: Rasskaz and Erzaehlung. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(1), 91–122. 10.1017/S0142716415000430
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000430 [Google Scholar]
  22. Givón, T.
    (Ed.) (1983) Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C., & Morris, S. K.
    (2005) Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory and Cognition, 33, 1220–1234. 10.3758/BF03193224
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193224 [Google Scholar]
  24. 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, 787–814. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., & Witten, I. H.
    (2009) The WEKA Data Mining Software: An Update; SIGKDD Explorations11(1). 10.1145/1656274.1656278
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1656274.1656278 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hendriks, P.
    (2014) Asymmetries between language production and comprehension. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, Vol.42. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑6901‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6901-4 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2016) Cognitive modeling of individual variation in reference production and comprehension, Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–17. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00506
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00506 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hendriks, P., Koster, C., & Hoeks, J. C. J.
    (2014) Referential choice across the lifespan: Why children and elderly adults produce ambiguous pronouns. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 391–407. 10.1080/01690965.2013.766356
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.766356 [Google Scholar]
  29. Iraola Azpiroz, M.
    (2015) Anaphora resolution in children and adults: An experimental study of mature speakers and learners of Basque. Tübingen: Günther Narr-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Jescheniak, J. D., Schriefers, H., & Hantsch, A.
    (2001) Semantic and phonological activation in noun and pronoun production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1058–1078.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Jüngling, N., & Lenhard, W.
    (2006) Aktualisierter Schreibwortschatz von Grundschulkindern. Universität Würzburg, Unveröffentlichter Datensatz.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kang, J. Y.
    (2004) Telling a coherent story in a foreign language: analysis of Korean EFL learners- referential strategies in oral narrative discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1975–1990. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.03.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.03.007 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kibrik, A.
    (2011) Reference in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215805.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199215805.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Leclercq, P., & Lenart, E.
    (2013) Discourse cohesion and accessibility of referents in oral narratives: A comparison of L1 and L2 acquisition of French and English. Discours, 12, 3–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Lemhöfer, K., & Dijkstra, A.
    (2004) Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs: Effects of code similarity in generalized lexical decision. Memory and Cognition, 32(4), 533–550. 10.3758/BF03195845
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195845 [Google Scholar]
  36. MacWhinney, B.
    (2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk, 3rd Edition. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Marinis, T.
    (2010) Using on-line processing methods in language acquisition research. InS. Unsworth & E. Blom (Eds.), Experimental methods in language acquisition research (pp.139–162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.27.09mar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.27.09mar [Google Scholar]
  38. Miltsakaki, E.
    (2001) Centering in Greek. InProceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Thessaloniki.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Montrul, S.
    (2004) Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 125–142. 10.1017/S1366728904001464
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001464 [Google Scholar]
  40. Papadopoulou, D., Peristeri, E., Plemenou, E., Marinis, T., & Tsimpli, I.
    (2015) Pronoun ambiguity resolution in Greek: Evidence from monolingual adults and children. Lingua, 155, 98–120. 10.1016/j.lingua.2014.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  41. Petermann, F., Fröhlich, L. P., & Metz, D.
    (2010) SET 5–10. Sprachstandserhebung für Kinder im Alter von 5–10 Jahren. Göttingen et al.: Hochgrefe.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Protopapas, A., Tzakosta, M., Chalamandaris, A., & Tsiakoulis, P.
    (2012) IPLR: An online resource for Greek word-level and sublexical information. Language Resources and Evaluation, 46(3), 449–459. 10.1007/s10579‑010‑9130‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-010-9130-z [Google Scholar]
  43. Ransdell, S. E., & Fischler, I.
    (1987) Memory in a monolingual mode: When are bilinguals at a disadvantage?Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 392–405. 10.1016/0749‑596X(87)90098‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(87)90098-2 [Google Scholar]
  44. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H.
    (1998) Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 2: The coloured progressive matrices. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment. Kinder im Alter von 5–10 Jahren. Göttingen et al.: Hochgrefe.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Rosa, E. C., & Arnold, J. E.
    (2011) The role of attention in choice of referring expressions. InL. Carlson, C. Hoelscher & T. F. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Rosselli, M., Ardila, A., Araujo, K., Weekes, V. A., Caracciolo, V., Padilla, M., & Ostrosky-Solis, F.
    (2000) Verbal fluency and repetition skills in healthy older Spanish-English bilinguals. Applied Neuropsychology, 7, 17–24. 10.1207/S15324826AN0701_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324826AN0701_3 [Google Scholar]
  47. Schneider, P., Dubé, R. V., & Hayward, D.
    (2005) The Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument. Retrieved [23.08.2013] fromUniversity of Alberta Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicinewebsite: www.rehabresearch.ualberta.ca/enni
  48. Serratrice, L.
    (2007) Referential cohesion in the narratives of bilingual English-Italian children and monolingual peers. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 1058–1087. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  49. Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., & Paoli, S.
    (2004) Cross-linguistic influence at the syntax-pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English-Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(3), 183–205. 10.1017/S1366728904001610
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001610 [Google Scholar]
  50. Sorace, A.
    (2011a) Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. 10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor [Google Scholar]
  51. (2011b) Cognitive advantages in bilingualism: Is there a ‘bilingual paradox’?InP. Valore (Ed.), Multilingualism. Language, power, and knowledge (pp.335–358). Pisa: Edistudio.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. (2016) Referring expressions and executive functions in bilingualism. InI. Sekerina, & L. Spradlin (Eds.), Bilingualism and executive function: An interdisciplinary approach (pp.669–684). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Torregrossa, J.
    (2017) The role of executive functions in the acquisition of reference: The production of demonstrative pronouns by German monolingual children. InJ. Choi, H. Demirdache, O. Lungu & L. Voeltzel (Eds.), Language acquisition at the interfaces: Proceedings of GALA 2015 (pp.316–330). New Castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Torregrossa, J., Bongartz, C., & Tsimpli, I.
    (2015) Testing accessibility: A cross-linguistic comparison of the syntax of referring expressions. InProceedings of the 89th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Portland. 10.3765/exabs.v0i0.3046
    https://doi.org/10.3765/exabs.v0i0.3046 [Google Scholar]
  55. Torregrossa, J., & Bongartz, C.
    (2018) Teasing apart the effects of dominance, transfer, and processing in reference production by German-Italian bilingual adolescents. Languages, 3(36). doi:  10.3390/languages3030036
    https://doi.org/10.3390/languages3030036 [Google Scholar]
  56. (to appear). Activation of referents in the bilingual mind. InG. Fotiadou & I. M. Tsimpli Eds. Individual difference in anaphora resolution: Language and cognitive effects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Torregrossa, J., Andreou, M., Bongartz, C., & Tsimpli, I.
    (2017) Pinning down the role of type of bilingualism in the development of referential strategies. Paper presented at theGenerative Linguistics in the Old World (GLOW40), Leiden, 14.032017.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Treffers-Daller, J., & Rogers, V.
    (2014) Grammatical patterns and the L2 lexicon. InJ. Milton & T. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Dimensions of vocabulary knowledge (pp.106–122). London: Palgrave. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑36831‑7_8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-36831-7_8 [Google Scholar]
  59. Tsimpli, I. M., & Sorace, A.
    (2006) Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. InD. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia & C. Zaller, BUCLD 30: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp.653–664). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Vogindroukas, I., Protopapas, A., & Sideridis, G.
    (2009) Expressive vocabulary test [Greek version of Renfrew Word Finding Vocabulary Test]. Chania, Crete: Glafki.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Wiltschko, M.
    (1998) On the syntax and semantics of (relative) pronouns and determiners. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 2, 143–181. 10.1023/A:1009719229992
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009719229992 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error