Cover not available
Article published In:
Language, Plasticity and Learning: Developmental Issues: Langage, Plasticité et Apprentissage : enjeux développementaux
Edited by Michèle Kail and Frédéric Isel
[Language, Interaction and Acquisition 12:1] 2021
► pp. 20–53

Adaptive functions of neurobehavioral plasticity in language learning and processing

A life span perspective

| CNRS, UMR Structures formelles du langage

This article presents a large scope of issues on early and late language plasticity that increase our understanding of the neurobehavioral dynamics of change, the main property of the learning brain. In their pioneering work, Bates and Kuhl have convincingly demonstrated that plasticity is intrinsic to development. Bates has provided new data on the impressive recovery of language in children with focal brain injury, highlighting that both hemispheres support the early phases of this change, contrary to previous assumptions. The fundamental reorganization of the early phonemic system around the age of 8 months proposed by Kuhl, combining neural commitment and social abilities, has powerful cascading effects for subsequent word learning. Our developmental crosslinguistic research on online sentence processing in monolinguals and simultaneous bilinguals has revealed distinctive linguistic patterns of “cue cost”, a multifactorial concept relevant for capturing the microplasticity of the processing system. Whatever the language, the shift around the age of 9 towards the canonical adult pattern indicates an efficient adaptive processing occurring with a small delay in bilinguals. Most salient, from childhood, bilinguals exhibit specific cue cost patterns with interactions. In older French adults, cue cost variability is mediated by processing speed which preserves online syntactic abilities but reveals plasticity limits in Alzheimer’s patients.

Keywords: Plasticity, children with focal brain injury, early phonemic learning, online sentence processing, cue cost components, monolinguals, bilinguals, aging
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Some issues in early plasticity
    • 2.1The impressive recovery of language in children with perinatal focal brain injury
    • 2.2The cognitive domain and differential functional plasticity: ‘Gradients of plasticity’
  • 3.The infant born to learn
    • 3.1Organization and reorganization of the perceptual system
    • 3.2Early speech learning plasticity: The intrinsic link between ‘native neural commitment’ and ‘social gating’
  • 4.Some research on microplasticity: Online sentence processing in a crosslinguistic perspective
    • 4.1Language processing and the Competition Model
    • 4.2Hierarchy of cue cost factors: Dynamics of developmental shifts in monolinguals
    • 4.3Simultaneous bilinguals: Specific developmental patterns of cue cost and adaptive shifts
  • 5.Late neurobehavioral adaptive plasticity: Language and the aging brain
    • 5.1Mechanisms of successful cognitive aging: Compensation, selection, maintenance
    • 5.2Microplasticity in the elderly: Sentence processing as an adaptive process
    • 5.3Towards the limits of plasticity: Preliminary results on French Alzheimer’s patients
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 27 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.20016.kai
References
Amichetti, N., White, A., & Wingfield, A.
(2016) Multiple solutions to the same problem: utilization of plausibility and syntax in sentence comprehension by older adults with impaired hearing. Frontiers in Psychology, 71, 789. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E.
(1999) Plasticity, localization and language development. In S. Broman & J. Fletcher (Eds.), The changing nervous system: Neurobehavioral consequences of early brain disorders (pp. 214–253). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., & Elman, J.
(1996) Learning rediscovered. Science, 274(5294), 1849–1850. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., Thal, D., Trauner, D., Fenson, J., Aram, D., Eisele, J., & Nass, R.
(1997) From first words to grammar in children with focal brain injury. Developmental Neuropsychology, 131, 275–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & Roe, K.
(2001) Language development in children with unilateral brain injury. In C. Nelson & M. Luciana (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 281–307). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Devescovi, A., & Wulfeck, B.
(2001) Psycholinguistics: A cross-language perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 521, 369–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., Reilly, J., Wulfeck, B., Dronkers, N., Opie, M., Fenson, J., Kriz, S., Jeffries, R., Miller, L., & Herbst, K.
(2002) Differential effects of unilateral lesions on language production. Production in children and adults. Brain and Language, 79(2), 223–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., Thal, D., Finlay, B., & Clancy, B.
(2003) Early language development and its neural correlates. In S. Segalowitz & I. Rapin (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology, Vol. 81, Child neuropsychology (pp. 525–592). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Beese, C., Werkle-Bergner, M., Lindenberger, U., Friederici, A., & Meyer, L.
(2019) Adult age differences in the benefit of syntactic and semantic constraints for sentence processing. Psychology and Aging, 34(1), 43–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Best, C. & McRoberts, G.
(2003) Infant perception of nonnative consonant contrasts that adults assimilate in different ways. Language and Speech, 461, 183–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E.
(2017) The bilingual adaptation: How minds accommodate experience. Psychological Bulletin, 143(3), 233–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickel, C., Pantel, J., Eysenbach, K., & Schröder, J.
(2000) Syntactic comprehension deficits in Alzheimer’s Disease. Brain and Language, 711, 432–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blackwell, A., & Bates, E.
(1995) Inducing agrammatic profiles in normal: Evidence for the selective vulnerability of morphology under cognitive resource limitation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 71, 228–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boysson-Bardies, B., & Vihman, M.
(1991) Adaptation to language: evidence from babbling and first words in four languages. Language, 671, 297–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brauer, J., Xiao, Y., Poulain, T., Friederici, A., & Schirmer, A.
(2016) Frequency of maternal touch predicts resting activity and connectivity of the developing social brain. Cerebral Cortex, 26(8), 3544–3552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brooks, R., & Meltzoff, A.
(2002) The importance of the eyes: How infants interpret adult looking behavior. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 958–966. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cabeza, R.
(2002) Hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults: The Harold Model. Psychology and Aging, 171, 85–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chiron, C., Jambaque, I., Nabbout, R., Lounes, R., Syrota, A., & Dulac, O.
(1997) The right brain hemisphere is dominant in human infants. Brain, 1201, 1057–1065. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V.
(ed.) (2003) Effects of the second language on the first. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, S., Dennis, N., Daselaar, S., Fleck, M., & Cabeza, R.
(2008) Que PASA? The posterior-anterior shift in aging. Cerebral Cortex, 181, 1201–1209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Houwer, A.
(2005) Early bilingual acquisition: Focus on morphosyntax and the Separate Development Hypothesis. In J. Kroll & A. de Groot (Eds.) Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 30–48). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Devescovi, A., & D’Amico, S.
(2005) The Competition Model. Crosslinguistic studies of onlineprocessing. In M. Tomasello & D. Slobin (Eds.) Beyond Nature-Nurture. Essays in Honor of Elizabeth Bates (pp. 165–191). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dick, F., Bates, E., Ferstl, E., & Friederici, A.
(1999) Receptive agrammatism in English- and German-speaking college students processing under stress. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 111 (Suppl.1), 48.Google Scholar
Elman, J.
(2001) Connectionism and language acquisition. In M. Tomasello & E. Bates (Eds.) Language development/ The essential readings (pp. 295–307). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Elman, J., Bates, E., Johnson, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K.
(1996) Rethinking innateness. A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Engle, R.
(2002) Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 111, 19–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fedorenko, E., & Thompson-Schill, S.
(2014) Reworking the language network. Trends in Cognitive Science, 18(3), 120–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fenson, L., Marchmann, V., Thal, D., Dale, P., Reznick, J., & Bates, E.
(2006) MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories: User’s guide and technical manual. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
Fernald, A., & Simon, T.
(1984) Expanded intonation contours in mothers’ speech to newborns. Developmental Psychology, 201, 104–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friederici, A., Brauer, J., & Lohmann, G.
(2011) Maturation of the language network: From inter- to intrahemispheric connectives. PLoS ONE, 6(6), 20726. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F.
(2002) Portraits of the bilingual child. In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 User (pp. 167–178). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenough, W., Black, J., & Wallace, C.
(1987) Experience and brain development. Child Development, 58(3), 539–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F.
(1989) Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and Language, 361, 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gullberg, M.
(1994) Who is doing what to whom? Testing the Competition Model on Swedish. Working Papers at the Department of Linguistics and Phonetics. Lund: Lund University.Google Scholar
Hari, R., & Kujala, M.
(2009) Brain basis of human social interaction: From concepts to brain imaging. Physiological Reviews, 89(2), 453–479. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasher, L., Lustig, C., & Zacks, R.
(2007) Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. Kane, A. Miyake, & A. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 227–249). NewYork: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hauser, M., Newport, E., & Aslin, R.
(2001) Segmentation of the speech stream in a non -human primate: statistical learning in cotton-top tamarins. Cognition, 781, 53–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hickok, G., & Poeppel, D.
(2007) The cortical organization of speech processing. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 81, 393–402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isel, F., & Kail, M.
(2019) Neuroplasticity, network connectivity and language processing across the lifespan. Brain and Cognition, Special Issue, 1341, 67–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M.
(1989) Cue validity, cue cost and processing types in sentence comprehension in French and Spanish. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 72–112). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1999) Linguistic variations and cognitive constraints in the processing and the acquisition of language. In C. Fuchs & S. Robert (Eds.), Language diversity and cognitive representations (pp. 179–194). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Online grammaticality judgments in French children and adults. A crosslinguistic perspective. Journal of Child Language, 311, 713–737. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Online sentence processing from children and adults: General and specific constraints. A crosslinguistic study in four languages. In M. Watorek, S. Benazzo, & M. Hickmann (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on language acquisition. A tribute to Clive Perdue (pp. 586–615). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M., & Hickmann, M.
(2010) New perspectives in the study of first and second language acquisition: Linguistic and cognitive constraints. In M. Kail & M. Hickmann (Eds.). Language acquisition across linguistic and cognitive systems (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M., Costa, A., & Hub Faria, I.
(2010) On-line grammaticality judgments: A comparative study of French and Portuguese. In M. Kail & M. Hickmann (Eds.), Language acquisition across linguistic and cognitive systems (pp. 179–205). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M., Kihlstedt, M., & Bonnet, P.
(2012a) On-line sentence processing in Swedish: Crosslinguistic developmental comparisons with French. Journal of Child Language, 39(1), 28–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018) On-line sentence processing in simultaneous French/Swedish bilinguals. In M. Hickmann, E. Veneziano, & H. Jisa (Eds.), Sources of variation in first language acquisition. Languages, contexts and learners (pp. 313–338). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M., Lemaire, P., & Lecacheur, M.
(2012b) Online grammaticality judgments in young and older French adults. Experimental Aging Research, 381, 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, R., & Salthouse, T.
(1994) Processing speed as a mental capacity. Acta Psychologica, 861, 199–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A.
(1992) Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kempe, V., & MacWhinney, B.
(1999) Processing of morphological and semantic cues in Russian and German. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14(2), 129–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, D., & Adolphs, R.
(2012) The social brain in psychiatric and neurological disorders. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(11), 559–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J., & Bialystok, E.
(2013) Understanding the consequences of bilingualism for language processing and cognition. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(5), 497–514. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J., Dussias, P., Bice, K., & Perrotti, L.
(2015) Bilingualism, mind and the brain. Annual Review of Linguistics 11, 377–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P.
(1998) The development of speech and language. In T. Carey, R. Menzel, & C. Shatz (Eds.), Mechanistic relationship between development and learning (pp. 53–73). New York, NY: John Wiley & So Ldt.Google Scholar
(2004) Early language acquisition: Cracking the speech code. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 51, 831–841. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Is speech learning “gated” by the social brain? Developmental Science, 10(1), 110–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P., & Meltzoff, A.
(1996) Infant vocalizations in response to speech: Vocal imitation and developmental change. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100 (4Pt1) 2425–2438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P., Tsao, F., & Liu, H.
(2003) Foreign- language experience in infancy: effects of short-term exposure and social interaction on phonetic learning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1001, 9096–9101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P., Convoy, B., Padden, D., Nelson, T., & Pruitt, J.
(2005) Early speech perception and later language development: Implications for the “critical period”. Language Learning and Development, 1 (3&4), 237–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P., Stevens, E., Hayashi, A., Deguchi, A., Kiritani, S., & Iverson, P.
(2006) Infants show facilitation for native language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months. Developmental Science, 91, 13–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P., Ramirez, R., Bosseler, A., Lotus Lin, J. -F., & Imada, T.
(2014) Infants’ brain responses to speech suggest Analysis by Synthesis. PNAS 111, 31, 11238–11245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lautrey, J.
(2003) A pluralist approach to cognitive differentiation and development. In R. Sternberg, J. Lautrey, & T. Lubart (Eds.), Models of intelligence: International perspectives (pp.117–131). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E.
(1967) Biological foundations of language. New York NY: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindenberger, U.
(2014) Human cognitive aging: Corriger la fortune? Science, 346, 6209, 572–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, H., Bates, E., & Li, P.
(1992) Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 131, 451–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lövdén, M., Bäckman, L., Lindenberger, U., Schaefer, S., & Schmiedek, F.
(2010) A theoretical framework for the study of adult cognitive plasticity. Psychological Bulletin, 1361, 659–676. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, M., Almor, A., Henderson, V., Kempler, D., & Andersen, E.
(2001) Assessing working memory and language comprehension in Alzheimer’s Disease. Brain and Language 781, 17–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackay, D., & James, L.
(2004) Sequencing, speech production, and selective effects of aging on phonological and morphological speech errors. Psychology and Aging 191, 93–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B.
(1987) The Competition Model. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.). Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 249–308). Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & E. Bates
(Eds.) (1989) The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marchman, V., Miller, R., & Bates, E.
(1991) Babble and first words in infants with focal brain injury. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12(1), 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martinez, A., Moses, P., Frank, L., Buxton, R., Wong, E., & Stiles, J.
(1997) Hemispheric asymmetries in global and local processing: Evidence from fRMI. NeuroReport, 8(7), 1685–1689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDonald, J.
(1989) The acquisition of cue-category mappings. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 375–396). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Menon, V.
(2013) Developmental pathways to functional brain networks: emerging principles. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(2), 627–640. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mills, D., Coffey-Corina, S., & Neville, H.
(1997) Language comprehension and cerebral specialization from 13 to 20 months. In D. Thal & J. Reilly (Eds.), Origins of Communication Disorders (Special Issue). Developmental Neuropsychology, 131, 397–445. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Neville, H. J., & Bavelier, D.
(2002) Specificity and plasticity in neurocognitive development in humans. In M. Johnson, Y. Munakata, & R. Gilmore (Eds.), Brain development and cognition: A reader (pp. 251–271). Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Oberauer, K., Wendland, M., & Kliegl, R.
(2003) Age differences in working memory: The role of storage and selective access. Memory and Cognition, 311, 563–569. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramachandran, V.
(1993) Behavioral and magnetoencephalographic correlates of plasticity in the adult human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 901, 10413–10420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reilly, J., Bates, E., & Marchman, V.
(1998) Narrative discourse in children with early focal brain injury. Brain and Language, 61(3), 335–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reuter-Lorenz, P., Stanczak, L., & Miller, A.
(1999) Neural recruitment and cognitive aging: Two hemispheres are better than one, especially as you age. Psychological Science, 101, 494–500. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reuter-Lorenz, P., & Cappell, K.
(2008) Neurocognitive aging and the compensation hypothesis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 171, 177–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rivera-Gaxiola, M., Silva-Pereyra, J., & Kuhl, P.
(2005) Brain potentials to native and non-native speech contrasts in 7- and 11-month-old American infants. Developmental Science, 81, 162–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rochon, E., Waters, G., & Caplan, D.
(2000) The relationship between measures of working memory and sentence comprehension in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 43(2), 395–413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saffran, J., Aslin, R., & Newport, E.
(1996) Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 2741, 1926–1928. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saffran, J., Johnson, E., Aslin, R., & Newport, E.
(1999) Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults. Cognition, 701, 27–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samu, D., Campbell, K., Tsvetanov, K., Shafto, M., & Tyler, L.
(2017) Preserved cognitive functions with age are determined by domain-dependent shifts in network responsivity. Nature Communications, 81, 14743. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sebastián-Gallés, N., Echeverria, S., & Bosch, L.
(2005) The influence of initial exposure on the lexical representations comparing early and simultaneous bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(2), 240–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shafto, M., & Tyler, L.
(2014) Language in the aging brain: The network dynamics of cognitive decline and preservation. Science, 346 (6209), 583–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skeide, M., & Friederici, A.
(2016) The ontogeny of the cortical language network. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17(5), 323–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Staron, M., Bokus, B., & Kail, M.
(2005) On-line sentence processing in Polish children and adults. In B. Bokus (Ed.), Studies in the psychology of language (pp. 227–245). Warsaw: Matrix.Google Scholar
Stern, Y.
(2009) Cognitive reserve. Neuropsychologia, 471, 2015–2028. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevens, K.
(1960) Towards a model for speech recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 32(1), 47–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stiles, J.
(2001) Neural plasticity and cognitive development. Developmental Neuropsychology, 18(2), 237–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stiles, J., & Thal, D.
(1993) Linguistic and spatial cognitive development following early brain injury: Patterns of deficit and recovery. In M. Johnson (Ed.), Brain development and cognition: A reader (pp. 643–664). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Stiles, J., Brown, T., Haist, F., & Jernigan, T.
(2015) Brain and cognitive development. In R. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (pp. 9–62). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stine-Morrow, E., Miller, L., & Nevin, J.
(1999) The effects of context and feedback on age differences in spoken word recognition. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 54B1, 125–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thal, D., Marchman, V., Stiles, J., Aram, D., Trauner, D., Nass, R., & Bates, E.
(1991) Early lexical development in children with focal brain injury. Brain and Language, 401, 491–527. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thelen, E., & Smith, L.
(1998) Dynamic Systems Theories. In W. Damon & R. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 563–634). New York NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2003) Constructing a language: A usage-tased theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Trueswell, J.
(2008) Using eye movements as a developmental measure within psycholinguistics. In I. Sekerina, E. Fernandez, & H. Clahsen (Eds.), Developmental psycholinguistics. Online methods in children’s language processing (pp. 73–96). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Geert, P.
(2003) Dynamic systems approaches and modeling of developmental processes. In J. Valsiner & K. Conolly (Eds.), Handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 640–672). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Verhaegen, P., & Cerella, J.
(2002) Aging, executive control and attention: a review of meta-analyses. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 26(7), 849–857. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vicari, S., Albertoni, A., Chilosi, A., Cipriani, P., Cioni, G., & Bates, E.
(2000) Plasticity and reorganization during language development in children with early injury. Cortex, 36 (1), 31–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waters, G., & Caplan, D.
(2001) Age, working memory and on-line processing in sentence comprehension. Psychology and Aging, 16(1), 128–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Verbal working memory and on-line syntactic processing: Evidence from self-paced listening. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A(1), 129–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werker, J., & Tees, R.
(1984) Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavioral Development, 71, 49–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wulfeck, B., Bates, E., & Capasso, R.
(1991) A crosslinguistic study of grammaticality judgments in Broca’s aphasia. Brain and Language, 411, 311–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wulfeck, B., Bates, E., Krupa-Kwiatowski, M., & Saltzman, D.
(2004) Grammatical sensitivity inchildren with early focal brain injury and children with specific language impairment. Brain and Language, 881, 215–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar