‘She says, he says’: Does the sex of an instructor interact with the grammatical gender of targets in a perspective-taking task?

Aims and objectives: It has been claimed that grammatical gender can influence the perception of objects as being potentially more ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’. The present study investigated effects of facilitation or interference on object selection by speakers whose L1 marks grammatical gender even when selecting objects in an L2 (English) which does not mark grammatical gender. Additionally, and in order to establish whether bilingualism itself influenced performance owing to a proposed bilingual advantage in inhibitory control, we investigated whether bilinguals would be more efficient than monolinguals at taking the allocentric perspective and switching between perspectives. Methodology: Participants were asked to select objects by an instructor whose biological sex (and voice) was either congruent or incongruent with the grammatical gender of the object to be selected. Two groups of 16 bilinguals each were recruited on the basis of whether their L1s marked for grammatical gender or not, and a further group of 16 monolingual English speakers were tested as a control. Data and analysis: Groups were compared by means of mixed-design repeated measures ANOVAs with response times for target selections as the dependent variables. Findings: When tested in English, bilinguals whose L1 marked grammatical gender showed no effect of gender congruency in this task, nor did bilinguals outperform monolinguals in taking the allocentric perspective or in perspective switching. Originality: For the first time, potential grammatical gender effects were investigated on a task where the fast and accurate processing of real male and female voices is fundamental to the efficiency of object selection performance. Implications: The present findings are interpreted as evidence that the effects of L1 grammatical gender on tasks performed in an L2 do not extend to tasks where the link between biological sex and grammatical gender is not made explicit. </jats:sec

Immersive bilingualism reshapes the core of the brain

Bilingualism has been shown to affect the structure of the brain, including cortical regions related to language. Less is known about subcortical structures, such as the basal ganglia, which underlie speech monitoring and language selection, processes that are crucial for bilinguals, as well as other linguistic functions, such as grammatical and phonological acquisition and processing. Simultaneous bilinguals have demonstrated significant reshaping of the basal ganglia and the thalamus compared to monolinguals. However, it is not clear whether these effects are due to learning of the second language (L2) at a very young age or simply due to continuous usage of two languages. Here, we show that bilingualism-induced subcortical effects are directly related to the amount of continuous L2 usage, or L2 immersion. We found significant subcortical reshaping in non-simultaneous (or sequential) bilinguals with extensive immersion in a bilingual environment, closely mirroring the recent findings in simultaneous bilinguals. Importantly, some of these effects were positively correlated to the amount of L2 immersion. Conversely, sequential bilinguals with comparable proficiency and age of acquisition (AoA) but limited immersion did not show similar effects. Our results provide structural evidence to suggestions that L2 acquisition continuously occurs in an immersive environment, and is expressed as dynamic reshaping of the core of the brain. These findings propose that second language learning in the brain is a dynamic procedure which depends on active and continuous L2 usage

Linking tests of English for academic purposes to the CEFR: the score user’s perspective

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) is widely used in setting language proficiency requirements, including for international students seeking access to university courses taught in English. When different language examinations have been related to the CEFR, the process is claimed to help score users, such as university admissions staff, to compare and evaluate these examinations as tools for selecting qualified applicants. This study analyses the linking claims made for four internationally recognised tests of English widely used in university admissions. It uses the Council of Europe’s (2009) suggested stages of specification, standard setting, and empirical validation to frame an evaluation of the extent to which, in this context, the CEFR has fulfilled its potential to “facilitate comparisons between different systems of qualifications.” Findings show that testing agencies make little use of CEFR categories to explain test content; represent the relationships between their tests and the framework in different terms; and arrive at conflicting conclusions about the correspondences between test scores and CEFR levels. This raises questions about the capacity of the CEFR to communicate competing views of a test construct within a coherent overarching structure