Intensification can be expressed cross-linguistically by several morphological and syntactic constructions (among others, Ito & Tagliamonte, 2003; Hoeksema 2011, 2012; Rainer 2015). While intensifying adjectival compounds (henceforth IAC) (e.g. ice-cold) are a productive means to express intensification in Dutch and in English, in French this construction is hardly productive. In consequence, French-speaking learners may encounter difficulties acquiring IAC in L2 Dutch/English. Within the context of a research project on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in French-speaking Belgium (cf. Hiligsmann et al. 2017), we explore the impact of CLIL input on the acquisition of IAC in the L2. Our sample consists of French-speaking sixth grade secondary school pupils (aged 17-19), in CLIL and non-CLIL settings, learning Dutch (CLIL n=132; non-CLIL n=100) or English (CLIL n=90; non-CLIL n=90). A corpus study on written productions of these learners has already revealed that the CLIL students display an overall greater written proficiency (in terms of lexical diversity among others) (Bulon et al. 2017) and a more native-like use of intensifying constructions (Hendrikx et al. forth.). Since IAC were quite infrequent in the learner corpora, the present study uses a multiple-choice exercise to evaluate the learners’ receptive knowledge of IAC. Based on the literature on the acquisition of vocabulary and collocations (Laufer & Paribakht 1998; Pignot-Shahov 2012; Koya 2005; Gylstad 2007), we hypothesize that their receptive knowledge of IAC will exceed their productive knowledge. In order to distill the effect of CLIL, we include other target language exposure variables in our analysis (i.e. the number of years of target language learning and the current informal contact with the target language). We also include measures of receptive L2 vocabulary knowledge (PPVT-IV or PPVT-III-NL ) and of productive L2 vocabulary knowledge (MTLD ), as predictors for a learner’s receptive knowledge of IAC. Preliminary ...