“…Some of these studies compare CLIL learners' strategy use to their mainstream EFL counterparts' use in oral and written production in secondary (Celaya & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010;Martínez-Adrián & Gutiérrez Mangado, 2015) and primary (Agustín Llach, 2009;Celaya, 2008;Gallardo-del-Puerto, 2015;García Mayo & Lázaro Ibarrola, 2015;Martínez-Adrián, 2018;Pladevall-Ballester & Vraciu, 2017) education. The general finding is that CLIL learners produce fewer borrowings (L1 words without any morpho-phonological adaptation) in oral (Gallardo-del-Puerto, 2015; Pladevall-Ballester & Vraciu, 2017) and written (Agustín Llach, 2009;Celaya, 2008;Celaya & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010) production and tend to use the L1 as an interactional strategy to a lesser extent than EFL counterparts (García Mayo & Lázaro Ibarrola, 2015;Martínez-Adrián & Gutiérrez Mangado, 2015). Results in the use of foreignising (L1 words morpho-phonologically adapted to the L2), however, are somewhat contradictory, as its increased use from early stages observed in some studies (Agustín Llach, 2009;Celaya, 2008;Celaya & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010) is not confirmed by more recent studies (e.g.…”