The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE ARTICLE

Testing Bilingual Educational Methods: A Plea to End the Language‐Mixing Taboo

Eneko Antón

Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, , Donostia (Spain)

Search for more papers by this author
Guillaume Thierry

School of Psychology, Bangor University, , Gwynedd Wales (United Kingdom)

Search for more papers by this author
Alexander Goborov

Moscow Innovative Language Centre, , Moscow (Russia)

Search for more papers by this author
Jon Anasagasti

Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea—Universidad del País Vasco, , Donostia (Spain)

Search for more papers by this author
Jon Andoni Duñabeitia

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: j.dunabeitia@bcbl.eu

Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, , Donostia (Spain)

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jon Andoni Duñabeitia, Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, Paseo Mikeletegi 69, 2, Donostia, Spain 20009. E‐mail:

j.dunabeitia@bcbl.eu

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 21 November 2016
Cited by: 1

This research has been partially funded by grants PSI2015‐65689‐P and SEV‐2015‐0490 from the Spanish Government, PI2015‐1‐27 from the Basque Government, ERC‐AdG‐295362 from the European Research Council, and by the AThEME project funded by the European Union (grant number 613465).

Abstract

Language mixing in a given class is often avoided in bilingual education because of the generally held belief that one subject should be taught in only one language and one person should stick to one language in order to minimize confusion. Here, we compared the effects of mixing two languages and monolingual functioning on memory performance in immediate recall as a proxy for comprehension and attention during learning. In Experiment 1, nonbalanced bilingual youngsters were provided with definition pairs introducing familiar objects in a single‐language context (SLC) or in a mixed‐language context (MLC). After each definition block, participants were asked to identify previously introduced objects presented among a stream of Old and New items. In Experiment 2, the same speaker produced the two definitions in the mixed‐language context, thus violating the second principle introduced above. In both experiments we found no advantage for the SLC over the MLC of exposure.

Number of times cited: 1

  • , , (2018)., The Cambridge Handbook of Bilingualism