- Susan Ervin and Charles E. Osgood, “Second Language Learning and Bilingualism,” in Psycholinguistics, Ed. Charles E. Osgood and Thomas A. Sebeok (Bloomington, Ind., 1954), pp. 139–146.
- Ibid., pp. 139–140.
- W. E. Lambert, “Psychological Studies of the Interdependencies of the Bilingual's Two Languages,” presented to the Linguistic Institute of the Linguistic Society of America, mimeographed (1966), p. 14.
- Nelson Brooks, Language and Language Learning (New York, 1964), p. 267.
- Ervin and Osgood, p. 140.
- Ibid.
- Ibid., p. 141.
- John B. Carroll, rev. of The Measurement of Meaning, by Charles E. Osgood, George J. Suci, and Percy H. Tannenbaum, Language, XXXV (1959), 72.
- W. E. Lambert, “Behavioral Evidence for Contrasting Forms of Bilingualism,” Report of the Twelfth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, Ed. Michael Zarechnak, Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, Georgetown University, No. 14 (Washington, D.C., 1961), p. 76.
- Cf. A. Richard Diebold, Jr., “The Consequences of Early Bilingualism in Cognitive Development and Personality Formation,” prepared for the symposium “The Study of Personality: An Interdisciplinary Appraisal,” Rice University, Houston, Texas, mimeographed (1966), p. 15.
- W. E. Lambert and S. Fillenbaum, “A Pilot Study of Aphasia among Bilinguals,” Canadian Journal of Psychology, XIII (1959), 28–34.
- Ibid., pp. 31–32.
- Eric H. Lenneberg, Biological Foundations of Language (New York, 1967), p. 207.
- paul A. Kolers, “Interlingual Word Associations,” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, II (1963), 299.
- Lambert, “Behavioral Evidence,” p. 78.
- Lambert, “Psychological Studies,” p. 41.
- Uriel Weinreich, Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems (The Hague, 1964), pp. 8–11.
- Ervin and Osgood, p. 140.
- J. C. Catford (A Linguistic Theory of Translation [London, 1965]) has provided a great deal of evidence on the noncompoundability of language pairs. Even two dialects of the same language frequently have noncompoundable subsystems. He cites this example on p. 37: Standard English has a two-dimensional system of demonstratives (this, that/ these, those), but NE Scots has a unidimensional system (this, that, yon) in which plurality is irrelevant. These two systems cannot be compounded.
- On the other hand, there are example of dialects which differ only in a few phonological rules, such as Pig Latin and English. Here a compound system might be possible but would be superfluous. The Pig Latin form is always predictable from the English word. If a new word is brought into English, e.g., Sputnik, there is no doubt about what the Pig Latin equivalent will be.
- Einar Haugen, Bilingualism in the Americas: A Bibliography and Research Guide, Publication of the American Dialect Society, No. 26 (University, Ala., 1956), p. 69.
- Choose new content alerts to be informed about new research of interest to you
- Easy remote access to your institution's subscriptions on any device, from any location
- Save your searches and schedule alerts to send you new results
- Export your search results into a .csv file to support your research