Effects of Linguistic Distance on Second Language Brain Activations in Bilinguals: An Exploratory Coordinate-Based Meta-Analysis

source extracted confidence: high 2026-04-09

Effects of Linguistic Distance on Second Language Brain Activations in Bilinguals: An Exploratory Coordinate-Based Meta-Analysis

Cargnelutti et al., 2021 | Front Hum Neurosci | Systematic Review

Citation

Cargnelutti Elisa, Tomasino Barbara, Fabbro Franco. Effects of Linguistic Distance on Second Language Brain Activations in Bilinguals: An Exploratory Coordinate-Based Meta-Analysis. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021;15:744489. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2021.744489

Abstract

In this quantitative meta-analysis, we used the activation likelihood estimation (ALE) approach to address the effects of linguistic distance between first (L1) and second (L2) languages on language-related brain activations. In particular, we investigated how L2-related networks may change in response to linguistic distance from L1. Thus, we examined L2 brain activations in two groups of participants with English as L2 and either (i) a European language (European group, n = 13 studies) or (ii) Chinese (Chinese group, n = 18 studies) as L1. We further explored the modulatory effect of age of appropriation (AoA) and proficiency of L2. We found that, irrespective of L1-L2 distance-and to an extent-irrespective of L2 proficiency, L2 recruits brain areas supporting higher-order cognitive functions (e.g., cognitive control), although with group-specific differences (e.g., the insula region in the European group and the frontal cortex in the Chinese group). The Chinese group also selectively activated the parietal lobe, but this did not occur in the subgroup with high L2 proficiency. These preliminary results highlight the relevance of linguistic distance and call for future research to generalize findings to other language pairs and shed further light on the interaction between linguistic distance, AoA, and proficiency of L2.

Key Findings

These preliminary results highlight the relevance of linguistic distance and call for future research to generalize findings to other language pairs and shed further light on the interaction between linguistic distance, AoA, and proficiency of L2.

Outcomes Measured

  • Requires manual extraction

Population

Field Value
Population See abstract
Sample Size 13
Age Range See abstract
Condition cognitive

MeSH Terms

  • No MeSH terms indexed

Evidence Classification

  • Level: Systematic Review
  • Publication Types: Systematic Review, Journal Article
  • Vertical: ginger

Provenance

Source extracted via PubMed E-utilities API on 2026-04-09