First- and Second-Language Acquisitionin Early Childhood

Beverly A. Clark

AbstractNoting the importance of language ac-quisition for children�s physical, social,and cognitive development, this paperdiscusses first- and second-languageacquisition in children. After providingbackground on second-language ac-quisition, the paper discusses the con-troversy surrounding bilingual educa-tion programs. The paper then exploreswhat is known about language learn-ing, noting that in both first- and sec-ond-language acquisition, a stimulat-ing and rich linguistic environment willsupport language development. Thepaper concludes with a discussion offactors that contribute to students� aca-demic success, including using stu-dents� first language to provide aca-demic instruction for as long as pos-sible and using an active discoveryapproach to teaching and learning.

Language is inextricably entwined with our mental life�our perceiving, our remembering, our attending, ourcomprehending, our thinking�in short, all of our attemptsto make sense of our experience in the world�.(Lindfors, 1991, p. 8)

Although there are many differences in parent-child interaction patternsaround the world, virtually all normally developing children becomelanguage users at the same rate. The way children learn languagefollows a specific pattern and is inherently systemic in nature. It is clearthat children must be exposed to language and be able to interact withothers, but how that exposure and interaction occur is extremely variable.Even though young children are not formally taught language, languageacquisition is part of the overall development of children physically,socially, and cognitively. There is strong evidence that children may neveracquire a language if they have not been exposed to a language beforethey reach the age of 6 or 7. Children between the ages of 2 and 6acquire language so rapidly that by 6 they are competent language users.By the time children are of school-age, they have an amazing languageability; it is a seemingly effortless acquisition (Cole & Cole, 1993; Curtiss,1977; Goldin-Meadow, 1982; Lindfors, 1991; McLaughlin, 1984; New-port, 1991).

There remains a great deal that we do not know about language develop-ment in children. A child�s language is constantly developing and chang-ing. Children are actively engaging in communication as they are learningto communicate. The child is the active party in the language-learningprocess and in the process of making sense of language. His experienceand interaction with others give him the background to relate language tothe sound/meaning relationship and to the purpose it represents. Childrennaturally obtain a �communicative competence,� intrinsically understandthe rules of grammar, and gain knowledge of the rules of using language.Linguistic structure comes through the child�s own cognitive and socialactivity. Although there is great variation between individual children andthe rate of their language acquisition, there is little variation in the patternof development between languages. One language is not more difficultthan another, as we can establish by observing the ease with which

181

182 Beverly A. Clark

children acquire different languages by the same age.Virtually every child develops linguistic and communi-cative competence, and it is learned naturally and incontext, not arranged in an easy-to-difficult sequence.The fact that both children and adults constantlycommunicate with a high degree of success isevidence that we are all following the same rules forappropriate communication behavior (Lindfors, 1991;McLaughlin, 1984). Patton Tabors asks educators tothink of language as a �puzzle� with all of the piecesneeding to come together for language to really work.These pieces of the puzzle are phonology, vocabulary,grammar, discourse, and pragmatics (Tabors, 1997).

Language is also an important way for us to makesense out of our past experience, to learn from it, andto make it comprehensible. In the beginning,children�s language growth comes from their directexperience. It is personal and related to the present.As their language understanding grows, children canrelate to ever more expanding situations. This earlylanguage experience is necessary to be able to uselanguage symbols apart from actual situations.Children use language metaphorically, providingevidence that for children language is creative as wellas imitative. For children, language is a powerful toolfor understanding the world around them. By ques-tioning, children become active in their attempt tocomprehend and learn (Lindfors, 1991; Winner,McCarthy, Kleinman, & Gardner, 1979).

Children are constantly modifying their speechdepending on their audience. An example of thisbehavior is when children modify their speech whentalking to younger children. As children develop theirability to use language, they become more and moreunderstanding of social situations and learn how tocontrol their own actions and thoughts. By listening tochildren�s self-corrections, questions, and languageplay, we realize the extent of their knowledge oflanguage structure. Those things that children canarticulate give us an understanding of what they cancomprehend. Their active, creative invention oflanguage is amazing and unique to each child. Lan-guage development is a gradual process and reflectsa child�s cognitive capacities. Language is purposeful.As children play and work, they do so throughlanguage (Garcia, 1994; Lindfors, 1991; McLaughlin,1984; Shatz & Gelman, 1973).

Children expand their development of language byrelating what they already know to what they encoun-ter. �It is only with one foot placed squarely, securelywithin the known, the familiar, that the child can placethe other foot in the beyond� (Lindfors, 1991, p. 282).Play is a way for children to extend their languageabilities; it is where new vocabulary can be intro-duced as well as new ways to use it. It also allowschildren opportunities to express their point of view,solve disagreements, and persuade peers to worktogether. Language play has a focus on the verylanguage elements that children will need to considerlater when they learn about language. Language is amajor means of influencing thinking and behavior�that of another person or one�s own. For language toexpand, children need to be given many opportunitiesto interact. Children learn from speaking. Childrenneed to feel socially competent and accepted tobecome competent language users. Language is theway children are socialized by adults and the waychildren learn to guide their inner voice. The centralrole of language is the way we communicate withother people and with ourselves (Berk & Winsler,1995; California Department of Education, 1988;Lindfors, 1991; Tabors, 1997).

In the average child, at whatever developmental stagewe observe, language is alive and well. Children�slanguage development is a creative process that onlyneeds a rich environment to thrive (Lindfors, 1991).

�Because Vygotsky regarded language as a criticalbridge between the sociocultural world and individualmental functioning, he viewed the acquisition oflanguage as the most significant milestone inchildren�s cognitive development� (Berk & Winsler,1995, p. 12). Put another way, language is the verbalway we express our understanding of the world(Piaget, 1926, 1983).

Background on Second-LanguageAcquisition

Most children in the world learn to speak two lan-guages. Bilingualism is present in just about everycountry around the world, in all classes of society, andin all age groups (Grosjean, 1982; McLaughlin, 1984).�In the United States monolingualism traditionally hasbeen the norm. Bilingualism was regarded as a social

183First- and Second-Language Acquisition in Early Childhood

stigma and liability� (McLaughlin, 1984, p. 3). Lan-guage represents culture, and the bilingual person isoften a member of a minority group whose way ofthinking and whose values are unfamiliar to the�majority.� Language is something we can identifyand try to eradicate without showing our distrust andfear of others (McLaughlin, 1984).

Even strong supporters of bilingual education such asCummins (1981, 1996) do not claim that bilingualeducation is the most important element in a child�seducation. In Cummins� view, it is more about goodprograms and about the status of the language groupin their community that will determine success(Cummins, 1981, 1996).

There are no negative effects for children who arebilingual. Their language development follows thesame pattern as that of monolingual children (Goodz,1994). �Children who develop proficiency in usingtheir native language to communicate, to gain infor-mation, to solve problems, and to think can easilylearn to use a second language in similar ways�(Pérez & Torres-Guzmán, 1996, p. 96). Even youngchildren who are learning a second language bring allof the knowledge about language learning they haveacquired through developing their first language. �Forthese children, then, second-language acquisition isnot a process of discovering what language is, butrather of discovering what this language is� (Tabors,1997, p. 12).

There is, however, much more variation in how welland how quickly individuals acquire a second lan-guage. There is no evidence that there are anybiological limits to second-language learning or thatchildren necessarily have an advantage over adults.Even those who begin to learn a second language inchildhood may always have difficulty with pronuncia-tion, rules of grammar, and vocabulary, and they maynever completely master the forms or uses of thelanguage. There is no simple way to explain whysome people are successful at second-languagelearning and some are not. Social and educationalvariables, experiential factors, and individual differ-ences in attitude, personality, age, and motivation allaffect language learning (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994;McLaughlin, 1984; Wong Fillmore, 1991a; Tabors,1997).

McLaughlin notes that �ultimate retention of twolanguages depends on a large number of factors, suchas the prestige of the languages, cultural pressures,motivation, opportunities of use�but not on age ofacquisition� (McLaughlin, 1984, p. 73). It should notbe surprising that bilingual children often have onearea of language learning that is not equal betweenthe two languages. It does not happen very often thatboth languages will be equally balanced. The societythat children find themselves in and how importanteach language is viewed within that society are veryimportant. Children will only continue to use twolanguages if doing so is perceived to be valuable. Aschildren go through school, they usually lose much oftheir ability in their native language. Children bringtheir attitudes toward a second language and thosewho speak it as well as their attitude toward their firstlanguage. These attitudes are important to thesuccess of the child learning a second language andretaining his or her language (Collier, 1995b; Lindfors,1991). Young children may appear to be bettersecond-language users because the language they arelearning is less cognitively complex to learn and theycan learn to speak a second language quickly andoften with a native-like pronunciation. But researchhas shown that adolescents and young adults areactually better at acquiring a second language (Collier,1995b).

Children do seem to forget languages more quicklythan adults, which can result in negative cognitiveeffects (for example, if they lose their first languageand, thus, the ability to communicate with other familymembers who may continue to speak only the firstlanguage) (Cummins, 1976, 1977, 1979; McLaughlin,1984; Wong Fillmore, 1991a). There is some thoughtthat children who may appear to be learning a secondlanguage very quickly at a very young age (before theage of 5), accompanied by the loss of their firstlanguage, have really replaced the first language withthe second language (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994).Many researchers believe that there is little benefitand potential harm in introducing a second languageat a very young age unless caregivers are careful tomaintain both languages as equally important andvaluable (McLaughlin, 1984).

Although languages and the way different culturesexpose their children to language vary, the outcome of

184 Beverly A. Clark

first-language acquisition is clear. Almost all childrenbecome fluent in their first language. This kind ofguarantee is not automatic with the acquisition of asecond language. Second-language acquisition is ascomplex as the acquisition of the first language butwith a wide variety of variables added in. An interest-ing metaphor that Bialystok and Hakuta (1994) use iscomparing the addition of a second language to homerenovation vs. new construction. People have theability to learn languages throughout their lifetime.How well they may be able to learn other languages(after the first) depends on many variables. The samestrategies used for first-language acquisition are usedfor subsequent language learning (Bialystok &Hakuta, 1994; Collier, 1995a; Lindfors, 1991).

This individuality in regard to the acquisition of asecond language is part of the controversy surround-ing bilingual education. Should programs support truebilingualism, a transitional program that only supportsthe native language until children have learned enoughEnglish to be taught in an English-only environment, orshould every effort from the very beginning be animmersion in English? �Confusion of goals�mainte-nance versus transition�has contributed much to thecontroversy swirling around bilingual education�(Hakuta, 1986, p. 193).

From the very beginning, Americans have wrestledwith their feelings toward other cultures and lan-guages. At risk is the definition of what it means to bean American. Many believe that bilingual programs donot encourage children to learn English but only givethem an opportunity to use their native language.There is also a strong belief that young childrenacquire languages easily, even second languages, so ifthey are in English-only classrooms they will learnEnglish (Hakuta, 1986).

Secretary of Education Richard Riley�s goal of havingevery English-language learner proficient in English inthree years represents the thinking of many politiciansand educators. To their way of thinking, there is noreason why this goal cannot be accomplished, andEnglish language learners have spent too much time innative-language instruction (Gersten, 1999).

What We Know about Language Learning

In both first- and second-language acquisition, astimulating and rich linguistic environment will support

language development. How often and how wellparents communicate with their children is a strongpredictor of how rapidly children expand their lan-guage learning. Encouraging children to express theirneeds, ideas, and feelings whether in one language ortwo enriches children linguisticly and cognitively.Engaging the children and encouraging them toexpress themselves interactively while building ontheir prior knowledge in real-life situations is aneffective way to build language experience (Cuevas,1996; McLaughlin, 1984).

Young children will become bilingual when there is areal need to communicate in two languages and willjust as quickly revert back to monolingualism whenthere is no longer a need. If children�s interactionsoutside the home are in only one language, they mayquickly switch over to that language and may onlyhave a receptive understanding of their first language.This process may occur even more rapidly whenthere is more than one child in the family. Childrenare not usually equally proficient in both languages.They may use one language with parents and anotherwith their peers or at school. At the same timechildren are acquiring new vocabulary and under-standing of the use of language, it may appear thatthey are falling behind in language acquisition;however, it is normal for there to be waves oflanguage acquisition. Overall, continued first-languagedevelopment is related to superior scholastic achieve-ment. When children do not have many opportunitiesto use language and have not been provided with arich experiential base, they may not learn to functionwell in their second language, and at the same time,they may not continue to develop their first language.This phenomenon occurs whether children aremonolingual or bilingual with the result that theirlanguage level is not appropriate for their age.Language learning is not linear, and formal teachingdoes not speed up the learning process. Languagelearning is dynamic�language must be meaningfuland used (Collier, 1995a; Grosjean, 1982; Krashen,1996; McLaughlin, 1984).

Tabor states that �young children, then, certainlyseem to understand that learning a second language isa cognitively challenging and time-consuming activity.Being exposed to a second language is obviously notenough; wanting to communicate with people who

185First- and Second-Language Acquisition in Early Childhood

speak that language is crucial if acquisition is tooccur. Children who are in a second-languagelearning situation have to be sufficiently motivated tostart learning a new language� (Tabors, 1997, p. 81).

There is real concern that if children do not fullyacquire their first language, they may have difficultylater in becoming fully literate and academicallyproficient in the second language (Collier, 1992,1995a; Collier & Thomas, 1989; Cummins, 1981,1991; Collier & Thomas, 1995). The interactiverelationship between language and cognitive growth isimportant. Preserving and strengthening the homelanguage supports the continuity of cognitive growth.Cognitive development will not be interrupted whenchildren and parents use the language they knowbest. Experience and ideas must be familiar andmeaningful to the child to be learned. Everythingacquired in the first language (academic skills, literacydevelopment, concept formation, subject knowledge,and learning strategies) will transfer to the secondlanguage. As children are learning the second lan-guage, they are drawing on the background andexperience they have available to them from theirfirst language. Collier believes that the skills childrendevelop in their first language form the foundationthey must have to be academically successful in theirsecond language.

Children who are literate in their first language mayexperience cognitive difficulties as they acquire asecond language. Literacy not only transfers acrosslanguages, it facilitates learning to read in anotherlanguage even when the language and writing systemappear to be very different. Reading in all languagesis done in the same way and is acquired in the sameway. The common linguistic universals in all lan-guages mean that children who learn to read well intheir first language will probably read well in theirsecond language. Reading in the primary language isa powerful way of continuing to develop literacy inthat language, and to do so, children must haveaccess to a print-rich environment in the primarylanguage (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994; Collier, 1995a;Cummins, 1981; Krashen, 1996; McLaughlin, 1984;Pérez & Torres-Guzmán, 1996). �When we learn anew language, we�re not just learning new vocabularyand grammar, we�re also learning new ways oforganizing concepts, new ways of thinking, and new

ways of learning language. Knowing two languages ismuch more than simply knowing two ways of speak-ing� (Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994, p. 122).

When children learn all new information and skills inEnglish, their first language becomes stagnant anddoes not keep pace with their new knowledge. Thismay lead to limited bilingualism, where children neverbecome truly proficient in either their first or secondlanguage. Supporting only English also gives childrenthe impression that different languages and culturesare not valued. On cognitive and academic measures,children who have lost their first language (so-called�subtractive� bilinguals) do not score as well aschildren who have maintained or expanded their firstlanguage as they acquire the second language(additive bilinguals) (Collier, 1992; Ramsey, 1987;Saville-Troike, 1982). When the first languagecontinues to be supported (and this support is espe-cially important when the first language is not thepower language outside the home), introducing asecond language between the ages of 5 and 11 willensure full cognitive growth in the first language,which will support full cognitive growth in the secondlanguage (Collier, 1995b).

The learner�s social skills and styles are also impor-tant to language learning. Children who are naturallysocial and communicative seek out opportunities toengage others. If these children are given lots ofopportunity to interact positively with others whospeak the target language, their language learning ispromoted. Personality, social competence, motivation,attitudes, learning style, and social style in bothlearners and speakers influence the way a childlearns the second language. With the variety ofprograms available to children, these elementsbecome variables that are difficult to factor in andwhose effect is difficult to predict (Lindfors, 1991;Wong Fillmore, 1991a; Wong Fillmore, 1991b).

Successful Programs

Collier and Thomas have been compiling data aboutlanguage minority student achievement across fiveprogram models from a series of three- to six-yearlongitudinal studies from well-implemented programsin five school districts. They have found that, amongthe variables, these programs had three components

186 Beverly A. Clark

in common that predicted academic success. Collierand Thomas found that these components were moreimportant than either the specific program type or thestudent background variables. These three compo-nents were (1) using the student�s first language toprovide academic instruction for as long as possible,(2) using an active discovery approach to teachingand learning, and (3) treating the bilingual programsas �gifted� programs so that the relationship betweenminority and majority students changed to a positiveenvironment for all. Within these components runs thekey thread of making sure that instruction is alwayscognitively challenging and complex (Collier &Thomas, 1995).

Collier and Thomas have developed a conceptualmodel for acquiring a second language at school thathas sociocultural, linguistic, academic, and cognitiveprocesses as the main components. They feel thatsecond-language acquisition needs to be looked at asthe very complex interdependent learning it is. Thereis an enormous difference between the time it takesfor a second-language learner to obtain oral fluencyor social language and academic language. It maytake only a short time for oral fluency, but it may takefrom seven to ten years to become academicallyfluent�while the English only student is progressingas well (Collier, 1995a). �Developing proficiency inacademic language thus means catching up andkeeping up with native speakers, for eventual suc-cessful academic performance at secondary anduniversity levels of instruction�a monumentalachievement� (Collier & Thomas, 1989).

In bilingual programs, students�whether they arelanguage minority students or not�continue to buildtheir cognitive and academic growth in their nativelanguage while they are acquiring the second lan-guage. Many studies have found that cognitivedevelopment and academic development in the firstlanguage have an extremely important and positiveeffect on second-language schooling (e.g., Bialystok& Hakuta, 1994; Collier & Thomas, 1989, 1995;Garcia, 1994).

The big difference in thinking about best programs forchildren is to trust that children bring so much toschool and have so much to offer. They need oppor-tunities and experiences to grow and to have more to

relate their prior knowledge to. Programs need to behighly interactive and child centered rather thanteacher centered. Children need to have the opportu-nity to solve problems and discover the world aroundthem. Children who are in a child-centered environ-ment where discovery learning is the instructionalmethod will be prepared to know how to get accessto new knowledge and how to apply, evaluate, andsolve problems as new information becomes avail-able. Active learning using constructivist and wholelanguage approaches uses meaningful activities andchildren�s prior knowledge, experiences, and percep-tions to build real knowledge (Collier, 1995b; Cuevas,1996).

Effective programs know that support for languagelearning and interaction is key to children�s growth.Language is a good example of an area in whichchildren come to preschool with a great deal to offer.Teachers need to learn to recognize how muchlanguage children have and how to encourage its useand growth through meaningful conversations. Theway children perceive, remember, comprehend, andmake sense of their world is all tied up in language.Preschool programs can provide many opportunitiesto interact with peers and new adults and encounter avariety of new ideas. Through the child�s own talkand interactions with others, their own ideas takeshape, and they have the opportunity to explore whatother people are thinking and go beyond their ownpersonal experience. �It is in children�s use of explor-atory language�the language of wondering, theirinquiring, their conjecturing, their considering, theirimagining�that we are occasionally able to glimpsethrough windows into our children�s thought�(Lindfors, 1991, pp. 8, 9).

References

Berk, L., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding children�slearning: Vygotsky and early childhood education.Washington, DC: National Association for the Education ofYoung Children. (ERIC Document No. ED384443)

Bialystok, E., & Hakuta, K. (1994). In other words. NewYork: Basic Books.

California Department of Education. (1988). Here they comeready or not. Sacramento: California Department ofEducation Report of the School Readiness Task Force.

187First- and Second-Language Acquisition in Early Childhood

Cole, M., & Cole, S. (1993). The development of children.New York: Scientific American Books.

Collier, V. P. (1992). A synthesis of studies examining long-term language minority student data on academic achieve-ment. Bilingual Research Journal, 16(1-2), 187-212. (ERICJournal No. EJ460177)

Collier, V. P. (1995a). Acquiring a second language forschool: Vol. 1, No. 4. Directions in language and educa-tion. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for BilingualEducation. (ERIC Document No. ED394301)

Collier, V. P. (1995b). Promoting academic success for ESLstudents. Jersey City: New Jersey Teachers of English toSpeakers of Other Languages-Bilingual Educators.

Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. (1989). How quickly canimmigrants become proficient in school English? Journal ofEducational Issues of Language Minority Students, 5, 26-38.

Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. (1995). Language minoritystudent achievement and program effectiveness. Researchsummary on ongoing study. Fairfax, VA: George MasonUniversity.

Cuevas, J. (1996). Educating limited-English proficientstudents: A review of the research on school programsand classroom practices. San Francisco: WestEd.

Cummins, J. (1976). The influence of bilingualism oncognitive growth: A synthesis of research findings andexplanatory hypotheses. Working Papers on Bilingualism,9, 1-43. (ERIC Document No. ED125311)

Cummins, J. (1977). Cognitive factors associated with theattainment of intermediate levels of bilingual skills. ModernLanguage Journal, 61(1-2), 3-12. (ERIC Journal No.EJ153774)

Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language profi-ciency, linguistic interdependence, the optimal agequestion, and some other matters. Working Papers onBilingualism, 19, 197-205. (ERIC Document No. ED184334)

Cummins, J. (1981). The role of primary language develop-ment in promoting educational success for languageminority students. In California State Department ofEducation (Ed.), Schooling and language minoritystudents: A theoretical framework (pp. 3-49). Los Angeles:National Dissemination and Assessment Center.

Cummins, J. (1991). Interview by author. San Francisco, CA.

Cummins, J. (1996). Negotiating identities: Education forempowerment in a diverse society. Ontario: CaliforniaAssociation for Bilingual Education.

Curtiss, S. (1977). Genie: A psycholinguistic study of amodern-day �wild child.� New York: Academic Press.

Garcia, E. (1994). Understanding and meeting the chal-lenge of student cultural diversity. Boston: HoughtonMifflin.

Gersten, R. (1999). The changing face of bilingual educa-tion. Educational Leadership, 56(7), 41-45. (ERIC JournalNo. EJ585637)

Goldin-Meadow, S. (1982). The resilience of recursion: Astudy of a communication system developed without aconventional language model. In E. Wanner & L. R.Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of theart. New York: W. W. Norton.

Goodz, N. S. (1994). Interactions between parents andchildren in bilingual families. In F. Genesee (Ed.), Educatingsecond language children: The whole child, the wholecurriculum, the whole community. Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press. (ERIC Document No. ED375641)

Grosjean, F. (1982). Life with two languages. Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.

Hakuta, K. (1986). Mirror of language: The debate onbilingualism. New York: Basic Books. (ERIC Document No.ED264326)

Krashen, S. D. (1996). Under attack: The case againstbilingual education. Culver City, CA: Language EducationAssociates.

Lindfors, J. W. (1991). Children�s language and learning(2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

McLaughlin, B. (1984). Second language acquisition inchildhood: Vol. 1. Preschool children (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,NJ: Erlbaum. (ERIC Document No. ED154604)

Newport, E. (1991). Contrasting concepts of the criticalperiod for language. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds.), Theepigenesis of mind: Essays on biology and cognition.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pérez, B., & Torres-Guzmán, M. (1996). Learning in twoworlds (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

Piaget, J. (1926). The language and thought of the child.New York: Meridian Books.

Piaget, J., (1983). Piaget�s theory. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.),Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. History, theory,and methods. New York: Wiley.

Ramsey, P. G. (1987). Teaching and learning in a diverseworld. New York: Teachers College Press. (ERIC DocumentNo. ED388729)

188 Beverly A. Clark

Saville-Troike, M. (1982). The development of bilingual andbicultural competence in young children. In L. G. Katz (Ed.),Current topics in early childhood education (Vol. 4).Norwood, NJ: Ablex. (ERIC Document No. ED250100)

Shatz, M., & Gelman, R. (1973). The development ofcommunication skills: Modification in the speech of youngchildren as a function of listener. Monographs of theSociety for Research in Child Development, 38(5), 1-37.(ERIC Journal No. EJ088199)

Tabors, P. (1997). One child, two languages. Baltimore,MD: Paul H. Brookes. (ERIC Document No. ED405987)

Winner, E., McCarthy, M., Kleinman, S., & Gardner, H.(1979). First metaphors. In D. Wolfe (Ed.), Early symboliza-tion (New Directions for Child Development, No. 3). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wong Fillmore, L. (1991a). When learning a secondlanguage means losing the first. Early Childhood Re-search Quarterly, 6(3), 323-346. (ERIC Journal No.EJ436469)

Wong Fillmore, L. (1991b). Second language learning inchildren: A model of language learning in social context. InE. Bialystok (Ed.), Language processing in bilingualchildren. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.