Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-rxvq6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-14T15:45:10.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parasitic vocabulary acquisition, cross-linguistic influence, and lexical retrieval in multilinguals*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2014

PETER ECKE
PETER ECKE*
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
*
Address for correspondence: Department of German Studies, 301 Learning Services Building, PO Box 210105, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721-0105, USAeckep@email.arizona.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The first part of this paper reviews research evidence for typological similarity and/or L2 status as determinants of cross-linguistic influence (CLI) in multilingual lexical production. The second part presents a model of vocabulary acquisition as a framework to explain CLI at the levels of form, (syntactic) frame, and meaning, as well as some of the developmental changes that have been reported for CLI patterns in relation to L3 learners’ proficiency. It is suggested that these patterns can be related to default processes and stages involved in the acquisition of individual word forms and their integration into networks of existing lexical triads, as described in the Parasitic Model of vocabulary acquisition. The third part of this paper points to research into the complexity and non-linearity of multilingual lexical development and the need to learn more about it.

Keywords

cross-linguistic influencemultilinguallexical retrievalproductiontransferthird language acquisitionvocabulary acquisition

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 18 , Special Issue 2: L3 Acquisition: A Focus on Cognitive Approaches , April 2015 , pp. 145 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments and suggestions on an earlier draft of this paper.

References

Abunuwara, E. (1992). The structure of the trilingual lexicon. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 4, 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahukanna, J. G. W., Lund, N. J., & Gentile, R. J. (1981). Inter- and intralingual interference effects in learning a third language. Modern Language Journal, 65, 281–287.Google Scholar
Aronin, L., & Hufeisen, B. (2009a). On the genesis and development of L3 research, multilingualism and multiple language acquisition. In Aronin, L. & Hufeisen, B. (eds.), pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Aronin, L., & Hufeisen, B. (eds.) (2009b). The exploration of multilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2012). The L2 status factor and the declarative/procedural distinction. In Cabrelli Amaro, J., Flynn, S. & Rothman, J. (eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood, pp. 95–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bardel, C., & Lindqvist, C. (2007). The role of proficiency and psychotypology in lexical cross-linguistic influence. A study of a multilingual learner of Italian L3. In Hyltenstam, K. (ed.), Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale dell'Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, Napoli, 9–10 febbraio 2006, pp. 123–145. Perugia: Guerra Editore.Google Scholar
Bartelt, G. (1989). The interaction of multilingual constraints. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (eds.), Interlingual processes, pp. 151–178. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2009). Bilingualism: The good, the bad, and the indifferent. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 3–11.Google Scholar
Bono, M. (2011). Crosslinguistic interaction and metalinguistic awareness in third language acquisition. In De Angelis, G. & Dewaele, J.-M. (eds.), New trends in crosslinguistic influence and multilingualism research, pp. 25–52. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Bouvy, C. (2000). Towards the construction of a theory of cross-linguistic transfer. In Cenoz, J. & Jessner, U. (eds.), English in Europe. The acquisition of a third language, pp. 143–156. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Brown, A. S. (2012). The tip of the tongue state. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Cabrelli Amaro, J. (2012). L3 phonology: An underestimated domain. In Cabrelli Amaro, J., Flynn, S. & Rothman, J. (eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood, pp. 33–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cedden, G., & Sağın Şimşek, Ç. (in press). The impact of a third language on executive control processes. International Journal of Bilingualism, doi: 10.1177/1367006912448126. Published online by Sage, September 12, 2012.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2001). The effect of linguistic distance, L2 status and age on cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 8–20.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2003a). Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Implications for the organization of the multilingual mental lexicon. Bulletin suisse de linguistique appliquée, 78, 1–11.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2003b). The role of typology in the organization of the multilingual lexicon. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2003), pp. 103–116.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B., & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B., & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2003). The multilingual lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Chandrasekhar, A. (1978). Base language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 16, 62–65.Google Scholar
Chumbow, B. (1981). The mother tongue hypothesis in a multilingual setting. In Savard, J.-G. & Laforge, L. (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th Congress of the International Association of Applied Linguistics, pp. 42–55. Quebec: Laval University Press.Google Scholar
Corder, S. P. (1983). A role for the mother tongue. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning, pp. 85–97. Rowley, MA: Newbury.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Santesteban, M., & Ivanova, I. (2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1057–1074.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G. (2005a). Interlanguage transfer of function words. Language Learning, 55, 379–414.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G. (2005b). Multilingualism and non-native lexical transfer: An identification problem. International Journal of Multilingualism, 2, 1–25.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G. (2007). Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G., & Dewaele, J.-M. (2009). The development of psycholinguistic research on crosslinguistic influence. In Aronin, L. & Hufeisen, B. (eds.) (2009b), pp. 63–77.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G., & Selinker, L. (2001). Interlanguage transfer and competing linguistic systems in the multilingual mind. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 42–58.Google Scholar
De Bot, K. (2004). The multilingual lexicon: Modeling selection and control. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1, 17–32.Google Scholar
De Bot, K. (2007). Dynamic systems theory, lifespan development and language attrition. In Köpke, B., Schmid, M. S., Keijzer, M. & Dostert, S. (eds.), Language attrition: Theoretical perspectives, pp. 53–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
De Bot, K., & Lowie, W. (2010). On the stability of representation in the multilingual lexicon. In Pütz, M. & Sicola, L. (eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition, pp. 117–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
De Groot, A., & Hoecks, J. (1995). The development of bilingual memory: Evidence from word translation by trilinguals. Language Learning, 45, 683–724.Google Scholar
Dentler, S. (1998). Zur Systematizität und Prognostizierbarkeit lexikalischer Interferenzen. In Hufeisen, B. & Lindemann, B. (eds.), Tertiärsprachen: Theorien, Modelle, Methoden, pp. 31–46. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J. (1998). Lexical inventions: French interlanguage as L2 versus L3. Applied Linguistics, 19, 471–490.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J. (2001). Activation or inhibition? The interaction of L1, L2 and L3 on the language mode continuum. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 69–89.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T. (2003). Lexical processing in bilinguals and multilinguals: The word selection problem. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2003a), pp. 11–26.Google Scholar
Ecke, P. (1997). Tip of the tongue states in first and foreign languages: Similarities and differences of lexical retrieval failures. In Díaz, L. & Pérez, C. (eds.), Views on the acquisition and use of a second language: Proceedings of the EUROSLA 7 Conference, pp. 505–514. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar
Ecke, P. (2001). Lexical retrieval in a third language: Evidence from errors and tip-of-the-tongue states. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 90–114.Google Scholar
Ecke, P. (2004). Language attrition and theories of forgetting: A cross-disciplinary review. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8, 321–354.Google Scholar
Ecke, P. (2008). Cross-linguistic influence on word search in tip-of-the-tongue states. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 515–527.Google Scholar
Ecke, P. (2009). The tip-of-the-tongue phenomenon as a window on (bilingual) lexical retrieval. In Pavlenko, A. (ed.), The bilingual mental lexicon: Interdisciplinary approaches, pp. 185–208. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ecke, P., & Hall, C. J. (2000). Lexikalische Fehler in Deutsch als Drittsprache: Translexikalischer Einfluss auf drei Ebenen der mentalen Repräsentation. Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 37, 31–37.Google Scholar
Ecke, P., & Hall, C. J. (2011, September). Lexical errors and cross-linguistic influence in the speech of Mexican L3 learners: The case of triple cognates. Presented at the Seventh International Conference on Third Language Acquisition and Multilingualism, Warsaw.Google Scholar
Ecke, P., & Hall, C. J. (2013). Tracking tip-of-the-tongue states in a multilingual speaker: Evidence of attrition or instability in lexical systems? International Journal of Bilingualism, 17, 734–751.Google Scholar
Falk, Y., & Bardel, C. (2010). The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition. The state of the art. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 48, 185–219.Google Scholar
Festman, J. (2008). Cross-language interference during trilingual picture naming in single and mixed language conditions. In Gibson, M., Hufeisen, B. & Personne, C. (eds.), Mehrsprachigkeit: lernen und lehren, Multilingualism: learning and instruction, Le Plurilinguisme: apprendre et enseigner, O Pluilinguismo: aprender e ensinar, Selected papers from the L3-Conference in Friburg, Switzerland, 2005, pp. 109–119. Baltmannsweiler, Germany: Schneider Hohengehren.Google Scholar
Fouser, R. J. (2001). Too close for comfort? Sociolinguistic transfer from Japanese into Korean as an L≥3. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 149–169.Google Scholar
Gabryś-Barker, D. (2006). Language activation in the thinking processes of a multilingual language user. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3, 105–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1993). Errors and their relevance for models of language production. In Blanken, G., Dittmann, J., Grimm, H., Marshall, J. C. & Wallesch, C.-W. (eds.), Linguistic disorders and pathologies, pp. 72–92. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
García-Mayo, M. P. (2012). Cognitive approaches to L3 acquisition. International Journal of English Studies, 12, 129–146.Google Scholar
García-Mayo, M. P., & Rothman, J. (2012). L3 morphosyntax in the generative tradition: From the initial state and beyond. In Cabrelli Amaro, J., Flynn, S. & Rothman, J. (eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood, pp. 9–32. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., & Werner, G. A. (2002). Semantic and letter fluency in Spanish– English bilinguals. Neuropsychology, 16, 562–576.Google Scholar
González Alonso, J. (2012). Assessing multilingual lexical incorporation hypotheses through a primed picture-naming task. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2, 91–107.Google Scholar
Goral, M., Levy, E. S., Obler, L. K., & Cohen, E. (2006). Cross-language lexical connections in the mental lexicon: Evidence from a case of trilingual aphasia. Brain and Language, 98, 235–247.Google Scholar
Green, D. W. (1986). Control, activation and resource: A framework and a model for the control of speech in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 27, 210–223.Google Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In Nicol, J. L. (ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing, pp. 1–22. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hall, C. J. (2002). The automatic cognate form assumption: Evidence for the parasitic model of vocabulary development. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 40, 69–87.Google Scholar
Hall, C. J., & Ecke, P. (2003). Parasitism as a default mechanism in L3 vocabulary acquisition. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2003a), pp. 71–85.Google Scholar
Hall, C. J., Newbrand, D., Ecke, P., Sperr, U., Marchand, V., & Hayes, L. (2009). Learners’ implicit assumptions about syntactic frames in new L3 words: The role of cognates, typological proximity and L2 status. Language Learning, 59, 153–202.Google Scholar
Hall, C. J., & Reyes Durán, A. (2009). Cross-linguistic influence in L2 verb frames: The effects of word familiarity and language proficiency. In Benati, A. G. (ed.), Issues in language proficiency, pp. 24–44. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hall, C. J., & Schultz, M. (1994). Los errores de marco sintáctico: Evidencia del Modelo Parasitario del Léxico Mental en un segundo idioma. Memorias del II Congreso Nacional de Lingüística, Special Issue of Estudios en Lingüística Aplicada, pp. 376–389. Mexico City: UNAM, INAH, and ECM.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, B. (2010). The languages of the multilingual: Some conceptual and terminological issues. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 48, 91–104.Google Scholar
Henning, G. H. (1973). Remembering foreign language vocabulary: Acoustic and semantic parameters. Language Learning, 23, 185–197.Google Scholar
Herwig, A. (2001). Plurilingual lexical organisation: Evidence from lexical processing in L1–L2–L3–L4 translation. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 115–137.Google Scholar
Horwinski Healy, K., & McDonald, J. (2008). Picture naming in L1, L2 and L≥3: Crosslinguistic influence in reaction time and accuracy. In Gibson, M., Hufeisen, B. & Personne, C. (eds.), Mehrsprachigkeit: lernen und lehren, Multilingualism: learning and instruction, Le Plurilinguisme: apprendre et enseigner, O Pluilinguismo: aprender e ensinar, Selected papers from the L3-Conference in Friburg, Switzerland, 2005, pp. 91–108. Baltmannsweiler, Germany: Schneider Hohengehren.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., & Tangelder, Ch. (1993). Semantic and phonological interference in the mental lexicon of learners of English as a foreign language and native speakers of English. In Chapelle, J. (ed.), Memory and memorization in acquiring and learning languages, pp. 143–164. Brussels: Centre de Langues Louvain-la-Neuve et an Woluwe.Google Scholar
Hufeisen, B. (1991). Englisch als erste und Deutsch als zweite Fremdsprache. Empirische Untersuchungen zur fremdsprachigen Interaktion. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jaensch, C. (2013). Third language acquisition: Where are we now? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 3, 73–93.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2009). Lexical transfer. In Pavlenko, A. (ed.), The bilingual mental lexicon: Interdisciplinary approaches, pp. 99–124. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Odlin, T. (2000). Morphological type, spatial reference and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 535–556.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A. (2010). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jessner, U. (2008a). Teaching third languages: Findings, trends and challenges. Language Teaching, 8, 15–56.Google Scholar
Jessner, U. (2008b). A DST model of multilingualism and the role of metalinguistic awareness. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 270–283.Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 47–77.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1977). Towards a characterization of the strategy of transfer in second language learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 2, 58–145.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1983). Now you see it, now you don't. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning, pp. 112–134. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Kohnert, K. J., Bates, E., & Hernandez, A. E. (1999). Balancing bilinguals: Lexical-semantic production and cognitive processing in children learning Spanish and English. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 1400–1413.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Gollan, T. H. (2014). Speech planning in two languages: What bilinguals tell us about language production. In Ferreira, V., Goldrick, M., & Miozzo, M. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of language production. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Michael, E., Tokowicz, N., & Dufour, R. (2002). The development of lexical fluency in a second language. Second Language Research, 18, 137–171.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149–174.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (1991). Some properties of the foreign language learner's lexicon as evidenced by lexical confusions. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 317–330.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1–75.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Schwieter, J. W., & Sunderman, G. (2012). Inhibitory control predicts language switching performance in trilingual speech production. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 651–662.Google Scholar
Lindqvist, C. (2009). The use of the L1 and the L2 in French L3: Examining cross-linguistic lexemes in multilingual learners’ oral production. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6, 281–297.Google Scholar
Lindqvist, C. (2010). Inter- and intralingual lexical influences in advanced learners’ French L3 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 48, 131–157.Google Scholar
Mägiste, E. (1979). The competing language systems of the multilingual: A developmental study of decoding and encoding processes. Journal of Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 79–89.Google Scholar
Mägiste, E. (1984). Learning a third language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 5, 415–421.Google Scholar
McElree, B., Jia, G., & Litvak, A. (2000). The time course of conceptual processing in three bilingual populations. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 229–254.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1978). Learners’ word associations in French. The Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 3, 192–211.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. (1983). Transfer as a second language strategy. Language and Communication, 3, 11–46.Google Scholar
Meuter, R., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40.Google Scholar
Michiels, B. (1999). Die Rolle der Niederländischkenntnisse bei französischen Lernern von Deutsch als L3. Eine empirische Untersuchung. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 3, 1–111. http://zif.spz.tu-darmstadt.de/jg-03-3/beitra9.htm Google Scholar
Möhle, D. (1989). Multilingual interaction in foreign language production. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (eds.), Interlingual processes, pp. 179–194. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Müller-Lancé, J. (2003). Der Wortschatz romanischer Sprachen im Tertiärsprachenerwerb. Tübingen: Stauffenberg.Google Scholar
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ó Laoire, M., & Singleton, D. (2009). The role of prior knowledge in L3 learning and use. In Aronin, L. & Hufeisen, B. (eds.) (2009b), pp. 79–102.Google Scholar
Opitz, C. (2013). A dynamic perspective on late bilinguals’ linguistic development in an L2 environment. International Journal of Bilingualism, 17, 701–715.Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Poulisse, N., & Bongaerts, T. (1994). First language use in second language production. Applied Linguistics, 15, 36–57.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. (1986). Crosslinguistic influence and the foreign language learning process. In Sharwood Smith, M. & Kellerman, E. (eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition, pp. 150–162. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. (1987). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. (2001). Lexical transfer in L3 production. In Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) (2001), pp. 59–68.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. (2007). Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Rivers, W. M. (1979). Learning a sixth language: An adult learner's daily diary. Canadian Modern Language Review, 36, 67–82.Google Scholar
Sánchez, L. (this issue). Activation and blending in third language acquisition: Evidence of crosslinguistic influence from the L2 in a longitudinal study on the acquisition of L3 English.Google Scholar
Schmid, M. S., & Köpke, B. (2009). L1 attrition and the mental lexicon. In Pavlenko, A. (ed.), The bilingual mental lexicon: Interdisciplinary approaches, pp. 209–238. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. W., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing basic conversation ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In Day, R. (ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition, pp. 237–326. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Selinker, L., & Baumgartner-Cohen, B. (1995). Multiple language acquisition: “Damn it, why can't I keep these languages apart?” Language, Culture and Curriculum, 8, 115–121.Google Scholar
Selinker, L., & Lakshmanan, U. (1993). Language transfer and fossilization: The “Multiple Effects Principle”. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning, 2nd edn, pp. 197–216. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sills, R., & Hall, C. J. (2005). Cambios léxicos en el veneto de Chipilo, Puebla: una perspectiva psicolingüística. Lingüística Mexicana, 2, 277–293.Google Scholar
Sikogukira, M. (1993). Influence of languages other than L1 on a foreign language: A case of transfer from L2 to L3. Edinburgh Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 4, 110–132.Google Scholar
Singh, R., & Carroll, S. (1979). L1, L2 and L3. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5, 51–63.Google Scholar
Singleton, D. (1987). Mother and other tongue influences on learner French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 327–345.Google Scholar
Singleton, D. (1999). Exploring the second language mental lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Singleton, D. (2012). Multilingual lexical operations. In Cabrelli Amaro, J., Flynn, S. & Rothman, J. (eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood, pp. 95–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sjöholm, M. (1979). Partial dictation as a testing device: An analysis with special reference to the achievement made by Swedish- and Finnish-speaking applicants for English, 1975. In Palmberg, R. (ed.), Perception and production of English: Papers on Interlanguage, pp. 123–166. Åbo, Finland: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Söderman, T. (1993). Word associations of foreign language learners and native speakers: The phenomenon of a shift in response type and its relevance for lexical development. In Ringbom, H. (ed.), Near-native proficiency in English, pp. 91–182. Åbo, Finland: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Stedje, A. (1977). Tredjespråksinterferens i fritt tal – en jämförande studie [Third language interference in spontaneous speech – a comparative study]. In Palmberg, R. & Ringbom, H. (eds.), Papers from the Conference on Contrastive Linguistics and Error Analysis Stockholm & Åbo, 7–8 February, pp. 141–158. Åbo, Finland: Åbo Akademi.Google Scholar
Sunderman, G., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). First language activation during second language processing: An investigation of lexical form, meaning, and grammatical class. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 387–422.Google Scholar
Talamas, A., Kroll, J. F., & Dufour, R. (1999). From form to meaning: Stages in the acquisition of second language vocabulary. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 45–58.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: the declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition, 4, 105–122.Google Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 780–789.Google Scholar
Vildomec, V. (1963). Multilingualism. Leiden: A. W. Sythoff.Google Scholar
Vogel, T. (1992). “Englisch und Deutsch gibt es immer Krieg”. Sprachverarbeitungsprozesse beim Erwerb des Deutschen als Drittsprache. Zielsprache Deutsch, 23, 95–99.Google Scholar
Voorwinde, S. (1981). A lexical and grammatical study in Dutch–English–German trilingualism. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 52, 3–30.Google Scholar
Wei, L. (2006). The multilingual mental lexicon and lemma transfer in third language learning. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3, 88–104.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Williams, S., & Hammarberg, B. (1998). Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. Applied Linguistics, 19, 295–333.Google Scholar
Wolter, B. (2001). Comparing the L1 and L2 mental lexicon. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 41–69.Google Scholar
Wrembel, M., Gut, U., & Mehlhorn, G. (2010). Phonetics/phonology in third language acquisition: Introduction. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7, 1–3.Google Scholar
Zareva, A. (2007). Structure of the L2 mental lexicon: How does it compare to native speakers’ lexical organization? Second Language Research, 23, 123–153.Google Scholar
Zareva, A., & Wolter, B. (2012). The “promise” of three methods of word association analysis to L2 lexical research. Second Language Research, 28, 41–67.Google Scholar