Jan 27 ====== Paradis:2008 ------------ In reading Paradis immediately after Lederberg, it made me wonder if the same L1 attrition, or "majority L1/L2 - minority L2/L1" paradigm occurs with DHH children, in DoDP vs DoHP. Concerning the phenomenon that Spanish L1 - English L2 children exhibit separate production systems of Spanish and English plosives, but more bilingual-like sole perception of these, are there any well established theories of production and perception that can support this phenomenon? Also, will they eventually set separate perception systems? Personally, I also have issues with distinguishing German vowel quality in terms of length (e: vs. e) but I could produce them differently (only because I know that they should be pronounced differently and I pay attention to it). I would love to know whether I will be able to perceive them only by hearing and without knowing their phonetic transcription. A question about the methodology of Flege and Fletcher (1992) who found that Chinese L1 adults had more perceptible foreign accents than Spanish L1 adults although both groups were exposed to L2 English at similar ages: How are "perceptible" foreign accents evaluated? By judgement of individuals? If so, wouldn't social factors play an important role? such as their experience with Chinese & Spanish L1 speakers, their interest for the languages or their feelings towards the language & culture etc. Intuitively, I would imagine that typological distance between the L1 and L2 being considered for an adult or child will have an effect of the morphosyntactic acquisition. However, the paper shows empirical evidence for why this is controversial and why this may not always be the case. Any idea why this is so? I was quite interested in language shifting fact - so, the stagnation in L1 is inevitable in case of early L2 exposure? Or it can be prevented by some techniques? What is the difference between the language acquisition of L1 majority L2 learners and that of L1 minority L2 learners? The paper mentions that dual language children are the majority globally. Since this paper focuses mostly on studies of L1 minority children in L2 majority communities, it would be interesting to know more about the ways in which L1 minority L2 majority acquisition contrasts to bilingual language acquisition, particularly in multilingual community environments. Why is the verb "be" an exception to the fact that finiteness-marking morphemes are acquired later by L2-learners? It is mentioned that Child L2 learners demonstrate a similar error pattern to that of children with language impairment. Does this refer to particular population (e.g. children with SLI)? Would adopting teaching practices at school that draw from language intervention sessions benefit them? Given that the relevant studies indicate that bilinguals are not just "two-monolinguals-in-one", aren't standardized tests used to measure their abilities fundamentally biased against them since most of them are designed for native monolinguals?