中文摘要：

运用长时重复启动范式，探讨熟练和非熟练中-英双语者语言产生过程中非目标语言的激活与抑制。实验1探讨双语被试在学习阶段使用中文进行图片命名任务时，非目标语言英文概念层面的激活与抑制情况，结果发现，两种熟练水平的被试均没有出现重复启动效应；实验2探讨双语被试在学习阶段使用英文进行图片命名任务时，非目标语言中文概念层面的激活与抑制情况，结果发现，熟练双语被试没有出现重复启动效应，而非熟练双语被试出现了重复启动效应；实验3探讨非熟练双语被试在学习阶段使用英文进行图片命名任务时，非目标语言中文词汇层面的激活与抑制情况，结果没有出现重复启动效应。综合三个实验的结果可以表明，熟练中-英双语者语言产生过程中在概念层面上就对非目标语言（不管是一语还是二语）进行了抑制，而非熟练中-英双语者使用一语时可以在概念层面上抑制非目标语言（二语），但使用二语时不能在概念层面上抑制非目标语言（一语），要在词汇层面上才能抑制非目标语言（一语）。

英文摘要：

An important question in research on bilinguals is whether bilinguals activate information in both languages even when they intend to speak in only one of their two languages. Psycholinguistic and neuroscientific investigations have provided inconsistent data regarding activation of the two languages by using explicit task paradigms. However, most prominent theories of bilingualism assume that mental representation of languages can be divided into a lexical （word form） and a conceptual （word meaning） level. Thus, the notion of activation was ill-defined in previous studies and it is unclear to which degree words from the non-target language are processed by bilinguals. Therefore, innovative paradigms, conceptual decision tasks and lexical decision tasks were designed in this study to further explore the activation and inhibition of non-target language in bilingual speech production. In the present study, we used the task of cross-language repetition priming. Participants from South China Normal University included sixty students of non-English-majors who did not pass CET Band 4 and forty students of English-majors. All participants were Chinese natives aging 18-25 years, who learned English as a second language from about the age of 11. Participants were randomly divided into different experiments. Each experiment consisted of a study block and a test block. In the study block, bilingual participants named the pictures in the target language, and in the test block they were instructed to make a concept decision （Experiment 1 and 2） or a lexical decision （Experiment 3）. Non-target language words were presented in the test block and half of their translation equivalents were used in the study block. Some new words never used in study block as fillers appeared in test block. Then, Study status （studied vs. non-studied） was manipulated in the test block. The response times and accurate rates were recorded. In experiment 1, there was no cross language repetition priming effect in both highly pr