Psychological Science 21(3) 343 –348 © The Author(s) 2010 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0956797609360758 http://pss.sagepub.com

The human affinity for language begins at or before birth. Neonates show many perceptual sensitivities that are impor- tant for language acquisition (Gervain & Werker, 2008). In monolingual acquisition, infants must detect and learn the regularities that characterize a single language. In bilingual acquisition, infants must simultaneously detect and learn the regularities of each of two languages. This requires recogniz- ing both languages as native while continuing to discriminate them. What tools do neonates have available to negotiate a bilingual environment?

To break into two languages and bootstrap acquisition, one source of information that bilingual infants might use is rhyth- micity (Mehler, Dupoux, Nazzi, & Dehaene-Lambertz, 1996). Traditionally, the world’s languages have been classified into three rhythmic classes: stress-timed (e.g., Dutch), syllable- timed (e.g., French), and mora-timed (e.g., Japanese). Ramus, Nespor, and Mehler (1999) identified two acoustic dimensions that correlate with rhythmic-class distinctions: the standard deviation of the duration of consonantal intervals within each sentence (ΔC) and the percentage of vocalic intervals (i.e., vowels) within each sentence (%V; see Grabe & Low, 2002, for an alternate measurement scheme). Studies have revealed that although categorical divisions are useful, languages fall somewhat continuously along these dimensions (see Fig. 1).

Research has demonstrated the importance of rhythmicity in early language processing. Newborn infants exposed to only a single language prenatally show greater interest in their native language than in an unfamiliar language from a

different rhythmic class (Mehler et al., 1988; Moon, Cooper, & Fifer, 1993). Preferential attention to the native language shows an early effect of learning on language processing, either during prenatal development or immediately after birth.1 Studies also show that monolingual neonates can discriminate two languages from different rhythmic classes even if both are unfamiliar but typically fail at discriminating languages within the same class (Mehler et al., 1988; Nazzi, Bertoncini, & Mehler, 1998; Ramus, 2002; Ramus, Hauser, Miller, Morris, & Mehler, 2000). These findings are understood as evidence that although language preference is learned through experi- ence, the ability to discriminate languages from different rhythmic classes is an evolutionarily deep perceptual bias that operates independently of learning (Ramus et al., 2000). Moreover, it has been asserted that the ability to discriminate languages is foundational to bilingual acquisition (Nazzi et al., 1998). No studies to date, however, have actually tested either language preference or language discrimination in neonates with prenatal bilingual exposure. Here, we provide the first empirical test of the hypothesis that the same initial perceptual biases and early learning mechanisms that underlie monolin- gual acquisition operate in the bilingual neonate to propel bilingual acquisition.

Corresponding Author: Janet F. Werker, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z4 E-mail: [email protected]

The Roots of Bilingualism in Newborns

Krista Byers-Heinlein1, Tracey C. Burns2, and Janet F. Werker1 1Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, and 2Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France

Abstract

The first steps toward bilingual language acquisition have already begun at birth. When tested on their preference for English versus Tagalog, newborns whose mothers spoke only English during pregnancy showed a robust preference for English. In contrast, newborns whose mothers spoke both English and Tagalog regularly during pregnancy showed equal preference for both languages. A group of newborns whose mothers had spoken both Chinese and English showed an intermediate pattern of preference for Tagalog over English. Preference for two languages does not suggest confusion between them, however. Study 2 showed that both English monolingual newborns and Tagalog-English bilingual newborns could discriminate English from Tagalog. The same perceptual and learning mechanisms that support acquisition in a monolingual environment thus also naturally support bilingual acquisition.

Keywords

newborns, bilingualism, language discrimination, perceptual learning

Received 11/26/08; Revision accepted 7/26/09

Research Report

at UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ on June 10, 2010pss.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pss.sagepub.com/

344 Byers-Heinlein et al.

To test this hypothesis, we explored the earliest foundations of two capacities crucial to bilingual acquisition. We com- pared preference for (Study 1) and discrimination of (Study 2) English and Tagalog (languages from different rhythmic classes) in bilingual newborns, whose mothers spoke both lan- guages regularly during pregnancy, with those of monolingual newborns, whose mothers spoke only English during preg- nancy. Although it could be the case that infants only gradually develop the skills to negotiate a bilingual environment (Arn- berg & Arnberg, 1985), our results demonstrate that from birth, the recognition and discrimination skills that support monolingual acquisition also support bilingual acquisition.

Study 1a No previous studies have investigated language preference in bilingual neonates. Although monolingual neonates orient more toward their native language than toward an unfamiliar language in preferential listening tasks, for optimal learning, infants growing up bilingual should orient to both of their native languages. To investigate the impact of prenatal

experience on language preference at birth, we tested newborn infants for their preference for syllable-timed Tagalog (a major language of the Philippines; Bird, Fais, & Werker, 2005), rela- tive to English, a stress-timed language (Ramus et al., 1999; see Fig. 1). Two groups of neonates were tested: English mono- linguals (whose mothers spoke only English during pregnancy) and Tagalog-English bilinguals (whose mothers spoke both English and Tagalog regularly during pregnancy). We expected that monolinguals would be significantly less interested in Tagalog than in English, as Tagalog was unfamiliar (Mehler et al., 1988; Moon et al., 1993). The previously untested pre- diction was that bilinguals would be interested in both of their native languages.

Method Testing was conducted at a maternity hospital in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, a multicultural city where English is the majority language but many other languages are widely used. Thirty newborn infants (0–5 days old), half from mono- lingual English backgrounds and half from bilingual

English (stress)

0.060

0.055

0.050

∆ C 0.045

0.040

0.035

0.030

35 40 45 50 %V

55 60 65

Dutch (stress)

Tagalog (syllable)

French (syllable) Mandarin (syllable)

Cantonese (syllable)

Japanese (mora)

Experimental Languages Example Languages

Fig. 1. Mean location of languages in the (%V, ΔC) plane. ΔC represents the standard deviation of the duration of consonantal intervals within each sentence; %V represents the percentage of vocalic intervals (i.e., vowels) within each sentence. Measurements for English and the languages used as rhythmic-class examples in this article are from Ramus, Nespor, and Mehler (1999). Measurements for Tagalog are from Bird, Fais, and Werker (2005); those for Cantonese are from (Mok, in press); and those for Mandarin are averaged from Mok (in press) and Lin and Wang (2007).

at UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ on June 10, 2010pss.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pss.sagepub.com/

The Roots of Bilingualism in Newborns 345

Tagalog-English backgrounds (henceforth called Tagalog bilinguals) completed the study.2 Mothers of Tagalog bilin- guals reported speaking each language 30% to 70% of the time.

Stimuli were sentences matched for pitch, duration, and number of syllables. They were recorded from native English and native Tagalog speakers and low-pass filtered to a cutoff of 400 Hz, to remove surface segmental cues while preserving rhythmicity. Infants were tested using a high-amplitude sucking- preference procedure, which capitalizes on newborns’ sucking reflex. Newborns sucked on a rubber nipple and were played a sentence contingently on producing a suck in the upper 80% of their sucking range, as calculated by the computer during an initial silent baseline minute. Infants were presented with 10 min of speech, alternating each minute between English and Tagalog. Four different English and four different Tagalog sentences were used, recorded from three native English and three native Tagalog speakers. The order of the two languages was counterbalanced. To assess preference, the number of high-amplitude sucks produced during Tagalog minutes ver- sus English minutes was compared.

Results

A preference score was computed for each infant, as the differ- ence in the average number of high-amplitude sucks produced during Tagalog minutes minus those produced during English minutes (see Fig. 2). One English monolingual and one Taga- log bilingual outlier, whose preference scores were more than 2 SDs from their group’s mean, were removed.3 Preliminary analyses suggested heterogeneity among group variances, Levene’s F(1, 26) = 4.87, p =.036; therefore, subsequent anal- yses used Welch’s correction. This correction often yields noninteger estimates of degrees of freedom.

To determine whether the groups could be characterized as having significant absolute preference for one language over the other, two-tailed one-sample t tests were conducted, comparing infants’ preference scores with zero. Monolingual English infants were significantly less interested in Tagalog than in English, t(13) = –3.44, p = .004. Tagalog bilinguals did not show a significant preference for either language, t(13) = 1.76, p = .103. To directly compare the performance of the two groups, a planned directional comparison of

Tagalog Bilinguals

Chinese Bilinguals

English Monolinguals

Ta ga

lo g

P re

fe re

nc e

S co

re E

ng lis

p > .10

p = .004

p = .046

p = .035

p = .003

−5

−10

−15

Fig. 2. Individual preference scores (colored symbols) and group means (open symbols) for monolingual English, Chinese-English bilingual, and Tagalog-English bilingual infants in Studies 1a and 1b. Preference scores were calculated by subtracting the average number of high-amplitude sucks produced during English minutes from the average number of high-amplitude sucks produced during Tagalog minutes. Significance values for between-group comparisons are shown with brackets; significance values adjacent to group means are for comparisons to zero. Error bars represent standard errors of the mean.

at UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ on June 10, 2010pss.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pss.sagepub.com/

346 Byers-Heinlein et al.

infants’ difference scores was conducted. Relative to their interest in English, English monolinguals had significantly less interest in Tagalog than did Tagalog bilinguals, t(18.8) = 3.08, p = .003.

Discussion The results of this study demonstrate that prenatal bilingual exposure affects infants’ preferences. English monolingual newborns were less interested in Tagalog than in English, but Tagalog bilinguals were similarly interested in their two native languages. Bilinguals’ attention to both languages is consistent with their having learned about two languages prenatally.

A counterexplanation consistent with these data would be that Tagalog bilinguals recognized neither language as native. Because bilinguals’ time is divided between two languages, their experience with each language may have been insufficient to have an effect on perception. The insufficient-experience explanation leads to a clear prediction: Regardless of the par- ticular native languages, any group of bilingual newborns will show the same pattern of language preference. Conversely, evidence that two groups of bilingual newborns demonstrate different patterns of preference would support the position that bilingual newborns have had sufficient experience to learn about each language prenatally.

Study 1b To directly test the insufficient-experience explanation, we sought a second group of bilingual newborns to evaluate on their pref- erence for Tagalog versus English. Because English was a common language to the two groups tested in Study 1a, it was necessary to find another group of bilinguals who had heard English prenatally. Chinese-English bilinguals were such a group that was available in our community.

Similarities and differences between Tagalog and Chinese make Chinese-English bilinguals an interesting test case. Both Chinese (Mandarin and Cantonese) and Tagalog have been classified within the larger typological category of syllable- timed languages (Bird et al., 2005; Lin & Wang, 2007; Mok, in press). But as shown in Figure 1, Tagalog and Chinese show rhythmical differences, and there is evidence that 4-month-old bilingual infants are sensitive to intraclass differences (Bosch & Sebastián-Gallés, 1997, 2001). Further, Chinese is charac- terized by lexical tone (perceptible by adults even in filtered speech; Fu, Zeng, Shannon, & Soli, 1998), whereas Tagalog is not. Overall, we expected that Tagalog would be somewhat, although not completely, familiar to the Chinese bilingual infants. Thus, because Tagalog is neither completely novel (as it is to English monolinguals) nor completely familiar (as it is to Tagalog bilinguals), we predicted that Chinese bilingual infants would show a preference intermediate to the prefer- ence shown by the two other groups and statistically different from each of them.

Method

Fourteen neonates whose mothers spoke both English and Chi- nese (Cantonese, Mandarin, or in two cases both) regularly dur- ing pregnancy were tested for their preference for Tagalog versus English, in a procedure identical to that used in Study 1a.

Results and discussion The results demonstrated that Chinese bilingual neonates did not show an outright preference for either English or Tagalog, t(13) = –0.49, p = .63. As predicted, however, these infants showed a pattern of preference distinct from that of either English mono- linguals or Tagalog bilinguals (see Fig. 1). Planned directional comparisons showed that their interest in Tagalog relative to English was greater than that of English monolinguals, t(25.5) = 1.89, p = .035, but less than that of Tagalog bilinguals, t(20.4) = 1.77, p = .046. Therefore, relative to their interest in English, Chinese bilingual infants were less interested in Tagalog than were Tagalog bilingual infants (for whom Tagalog was native) but were more interested in Tagalog than were English monolin- gual infants (for whom Tagalog shares few similarities with the native language). These results demonstrate that bilingual new- borns’ language preference is affected by the specific languages they heard before birth, indicating that bilingual newborns have indeed learned about both their native languages prenatally.

Study 2 Study 1 demonstrated that by birth, bilingual neonates have already learned about their two languages and, like monolin- guals, use this information to direct their attention. However, to successfully acquire the structures of two languages, bilingual infants must also separate and discriminate these languages. A possible interpretation of the results of Study 1a is that experi- ence with two languages can overwrite the perceptual biases that facilitate language discrimination and that Tagalog bilin- gual neonates have no preference because they lump English and Tagalog into a broad class of familiar language sounds.

Previous research supports the idea that any newborn can dis- criminate two languages as long as the languages are from differ- ent rhythmic classes (Mehler et al., 1988; Nazzi et al., 1998; Ramus, 2002). However, systematic studies have not been con- ducted to date with bilingual newborns. Because monolinguals are familiar with only one language, discrimination of any par- ticular language pair involves either discriminating a rhythmi- cally familiar language from an unfamiliar one or discriminating two rhythmically unfamiliar languages. For bilingual infants, successful acquisition requires their discrimination of two famil- iar languages, a potentially challenging and as yet untested task.

To investigate whether newborns with prenatal bilingual experience discriminate their native languages, Study 2 tested 50 newborn infants for their discrimination of English and Tagalog in a high-amplitude sucking habituation procedure.

at UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ on June 10, 2010pss.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pss.sagepub.com/

The Roots of Bilingualism in Newborns 347

As in Study 1a, newborns from a Tagalog-English bilingual background were compared with newborns from a monolin- gual English background.

Method Infants were habituated to either four English or four Tagalog low-pass-filtered sentences (counterbalanced) until sucking declined, so that the number of high-amplitude sucks across a 2-min window was at least 25% fewer than that produced in the previous minute. Infants habituated in an average of 7 min (range: 5–15), and the mean time to habituation did not differ across groups, F(2, 47) = 0.49, p = .62. At test, infants in the experimental condition heard two novel sentences from a new speaker in the other language (n = 32; 16 monolingual, 16 bilin- gual infants) for 4 min. To rule out spontaneous recovery (Jef- frey & Cohen, 1971), a control group (n = 18 monolinguals) heard two novel sentences from a new speaker in the same lan- guage. Bilingual controls were not tested, because spontaneous recovery was not expected to differ across groups. If infants could discriminate the languages, then those in the experimental condition would show increased sucking at test whereas those in the control condition would not.

Results and discussion Both English monolingual and Tagalog bilingual infants dis- criminated between the two languages (see Fig. 3). The num- ber of high-amplitude sucks was computed in three blocks: last 2 habituation minutes, first 2 test minutes, and second 2 test minutes. Preliminary analyses showed no effects or inter- actions with test order (English first vs. Tagalog first). A mixed 3 (block) × 2 (condition: control, experimental) analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant Block × Condition interaction, F(2, 96) = 3.20, p = .045. A follow-up repeated measures ANOVA showed that in the control group, sucking did not differ as a function of block, F(2, 34) = 2.04, p = .15. In the experimental group, a similar ANOVA with an addi- tional factor of exposure group (English monolingual, Tagalog bilingual) showed a significant effect of block, F(2, 60) = 4.64, p = .013, but no Block × Exposure Group interaction, F(2, 60) = 0.40, p = .67. Planned directional t tests compared sucking in the final habituation block with the average across the 4 test minutes (both test blocks). Both English monolin- gual infants, t(15) = 2.00, p = .032, and Tagalog bilingual infants, t(15) = 1.99, p = .033, showed a significant recovery of sucking during test. Tagalog bilingual infants, then, were still able to discriminate their two languages, despite having shown similar preference for the languages in Study 1a.

General Discussion Previous work with bilingual infants has shown that 4-month- olds can discriminate their languages auditorily (Bosch & Sebastián-Gallés, 1997) and visually (Weikum et al., 2007).

The current work reveals that language discrimination in bilin- guals is robust at birth and that language preference at birth reflects previous listening experience. Monolingual newborns’ preference for their single native language directs listening attention to that language. Bilingual newborns’ interest in both languages helps ensure attention to, and hence further learning about, each of their languages.

This study investigated neonates who were learning rhythmi- cally distinct languages. Still unanswered is whether the same sensitivity to rhythm can also support infants’ acquiring two lan- guages from the same rhythmic class. The differential preference for Tagalog by Tagalog-English bilinguals in comparison with Chinese-English bilinguals hints that bilingual neonates have some sensitivity to intraclass rhythmic differences or to other dif- ferences between language pairs in the same rhythmic class. Fur- ther research is required to directly test these possibilities.

In sum, these findings show that from the very beginning, the same perceptual and learning mechanisms that support monolingual acquisition are also available to support bilingual acquisition. Moreover, our results confirm that infants exposed to two languages throughout gestation have already begun the process of bilingual acquisition at birth.

Final Habituation

Test Block 1

Test Block 2

A ve

ra ge

N um

be r

of H

ig h-

A m

pl itu

de S

uc ks

/M in

Tagalog Bilingual Experimental Group

English Monolingual Experimental Control

p = .03

p = .045

p > .10

Fig. 3. Average number of high-amplitude sucks per minute as a function of group and experimental block in Study 2, which tested the ability to discriminate English and Tagalog. Results are shown for the Tagalog-English bilingual and English monolingual experimental groups and for the control group. Error bars represent standard errors of the mean.

at UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ on June 10, 2010pss.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pss.sagepub.com/

348 Byers-Heinlein et al.

Acknowledgments

We thank Marisa Cruickshank, Erin Moon, Vivian Pan, Ke Heng Chen, Ayasha Valji, Mohinish Shukla, and Laurel Fais for their com- ments, assistance, and support.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interests with respect to their authorship and/or the publication of this article.

Funding

This research was funded by grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Human Frontier Science Program, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and the James S. McDonnell Foundation to Janet F. Werker; by a University of British Columbia psychology postdoc- toral fellowship to Tracey C. Burns; and by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada fellowship to Krista Byers-Heinlein.

Notes

1. It is difficult if not impossible to separate the influence of pre- natal experience from the possible effects of very early postnatal experience. However, given the much greater amount of prenatal as compared with postnatal listening, we have highlighted prenatal experience throughout this article. 2. Data were excluded from an additional 28 infants in Study 1 (pref- erence) and 87 infants in Study 2 (discrimination) because of crying (12 preference, 27 discrimination), falling asleep or stopping sucking (12, 31), experimenter or technical error (3, 3), spitting out the rubber nipple (1, 5), high-amplitude sucks during less than 2 test minutes (0, 10), failure to habituate (0, 6), parental or hospital-staff interference (0, 4), and hiccups (0, 1). 3. Including these infants yielded the same pattern of results.

References

Arnberg, L., & Arnberg, P.W. (1985). The relation between code dif- ferentiation and language mixing in bilingual three- to four-year- old children. Bilingual Review, 12, 20–32.

Bird, S., Fais, L., & Werker, J.F. (2005, May). The phonetic rhythm/ syntactic headedness connection: Evidence from Tagalog. Poster presented at the semiannual meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Bosch, L., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (1997). Native-language recogni- tion abilities in 4-month-old infants from monolingual and bilin- gual environments. Cognition, 65, 33–69.

Bosch, L., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2001). Early language differentia- tion in bilingual infants. In J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (Eds.), Trends in bilingual acquisition (pp. 71–93). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Fu, Q., Zeng, F., Shannon, R.V., & Soli, S.D. (1998). Importance of tonal envelope cues in Chinese speech recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 104, 505–510.

Gervain, J., & Werker, J.F. (2008). How infant speech perception contributes to language acquisition. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2, 1149–1170.

Grabe, E., & Low, E.L. (2002). Durational variability in speech and the rhythm class hypothesis. In C. Gussenhoven & N. Warner (Eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology (pp. 515–546). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Jeffrey, W.E., & Cohen, L.B. (1971). Habituation in the human infant. In H. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 63–97). New York: Academic Press.

Lin, H., & Wang, Q. (2007). Mandarin rhythm: An acoustic study. Journal of Chinese Linguistics and Computing, 17, 127–140.

Mehler, J., Dupoux, E., Nazzi, T., & Dehaene-Lambertz, G. (1996). Coping with linguistic diversity: The infant’s viewpoint. In J.L. Morgan & K. Demuth (Eds.), Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition (pp. 101–116). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Mehler, J., Jusczyk, P.W., Lambertz, G., Halsted, N., Bertoncini, J., & Amiel-Tison, C. (1988). A precursor of language acquisition in young infants. Cognition, 29, 143–178.

Mok, P.P.K. (in press). On the syllable-timing of Cantonese and Beijing Mandarin. Chinese Journal of Phonetics.

Moon, C., Cooper, R.P., & Fifer, W.P. (1993). Two-day-olds prefer their native language. Infant Behavior and Development, 16, 495–500.

Nazzi, T., Bertoncini, J., & Mehler, J. (1998). Language discrimina- tion by newborns: Toward an understanding of the role of rhythm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 756–766.

Ramus, F. (2002). Language discrimination by newborns: Teas- ing apart phonotactic, rhythmic, and intonational cues. Annual Review of Language Acquisition, 2, 85–115.

Ramus, F., Hauser, M.D., Miller, C., Morris, D., & Mehler, J. (2000). Language discrimination by human newborns and by cotton-top tamarin monkeys. Science, 288, 349–351.

Ramus, F., Nespor, M., & Mehler, J. (1999). Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition, 73, 265–292.

Weikum, W.M., Vouloumanos, A., Navarra, J., Soto-Faraco, S., Sebastián-Gallés, N., & Werker, J.F. (2007). Visual language dis- crimination in infancy. Science, 316, 1159.

at UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ on June 10, 2010pss.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://pss.sagepub.com/