Language bias and proficiency effects on cross-language activation
A comprehension and production comparison
Recent research proposes that language bias and proficiency modulate cross-language activation in comprehension and production, but it is unclear how they operate and whether they interact. This study investigates whether stress differences between Spanish-English cognates (material, final-syllable stress in Spanish) affect how native-English second-language-Spanish bilinguals recognize Spanish words (materia “subject/matter,” second-syllable stress in Spanish). In a Spanish-English eye-tracking experiment (and parallel production task), participants heard/produced trisyllabic Spanish targets with second-syllable stress (materia) and saw four orthographic words, including the target and a Spanish-English cognate competitor. Cross-language activation was examined by manipulating the stress of the cognate in English. In comprehension, English cognates with the same stress as the Spanish target (materia vs material) were predicted to cause more cross-language interference than English cognates with a different stress (litera “bunk bed,” vs literal), but the reverse pattern was expected in production. Participants were assigned to a Spanish-bias condition (20% of English (filler) items), or an English-bias condition (65% of English (filler) items). Results indicate that English cognates with the same stress as the Spanish target interfered with the recognition of the Spanish target only in the English-bias condition (but facilitated its production), while increasing Spanish proficiency helped reduce this cross-linguistic interference.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Experiment 1: Comprehension
- 2.1Participants
- 2.2Materials
- 2.3Procedure
- 2.4Data analysis
- 2.5Results
- 2.6Discussion
- 3.Experiment 2: Production
- 3.1Participants
- 3.2Materials
- 3.3Procedure
- 3.4Data analysis
- 3.5Results
- 3.6Discussion
- 4.Discussion and conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References (68)
References
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Processing (Vol. 21). Cambridge University Press.
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1).
Blumenfeld, H. K., & Marian, V. (2011). Bilingualism influences inhibitory control in auditory comprehension. Cognition, 118(2), 245–257.
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2010). Praat: doing phonetics by computers. Retrieved from [URL]
Brown, J. D. (1980). Relative merits of four methods for scoring cloze tests. Modern Language Journal, 641, 311–317.
Canseco-Gonzalez, E., Brehm, L., Brick, C. A., Brown-Schmidt, S., Fischer, K., & Wagner, K. (2010). Carpet or Cárcel: The effect of age of acquisition and language mode on bilingual lexical access. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(5), 669–705.
Chambers, C. G., & Cooke, H. (2009). Lexical competition during second-language listening: Sentence context, but not proficiency, constrains interference from the native lexicon. Cognition, 35(4), 1029–1040.
Chee, M. W., Tan, E. W., & Thiel, T. (1999). Mandarin and English single word processing studied with functional magnetic resonance imaging. The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 19(8), 3050–3056.
Cooper, N., Cutler, A., & Wales, R. (2002). Constraints of lexical stress on lexical access in English: evidence from native and non-native listeners. Language and Speech, 45(3), 207–228.
Costa, A., & Santesteban, M. (2004). Lexical access in bilingual speech production: Evidence from language switching in highly proficient bilinguals and L2 learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 50(4), 491–511.
Costa, A., Santesteban, M., & Ivanova, I. (2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1057–1074.
Desmet, T., & Duyck, W. (2007). Bilingual language processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(3), 168–194.
Desroches, A. S., Newman, R. L., & Joanisse, M. F. (2009). Investigating the time course of spoken word recognition: electrophysiological evidence for the influences of phonological similarity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 211, 1893–1906.
Dijkstra, T. (2005). Bilingual visual word recognition and lexical access. In B. MacWhinney, J. F. Kroll, & A. M. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches (pp. 179–201).
Dijkstra, T., & van Hell, J. G. (2003). Testing the Language Mode Hypothesis Using Trilinguals. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 6(1), 2–16.
Duchon, A., Perea, M., Sebastián, N., Martí, M. A., & Carreiras, M. (2013). EsPal: one-stop shopping for Spanish word properties. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 1246–58.
Duffau, H. (2008). The anatomo-functional connectivity of language revisited. New insights provided by electrostimulation and tractography. Neuropsychologia, 46(4), 927–934.
Flege, J. E. (1987). A critical period for learning to pronounce foreign languages? Applied Linguistics, 81, 162–177.
García-Pentón, L., Pérez Fernández, A., Iturria-Medina, Y., Gillon-Dowens, M., & Carreiras, M. (2014). Anatomical connectivity changes in the bilingual brain. NeuroImage, 841, 495–504.
Golestani, N., Alario, F. X., Meriaux, S., Le Bihan, D., Dehaene, S., & Pallier, C. (2006). Syntax production in bilinguals. Neuropsychologia, 44(7), 1029–1040.
Gollan, T. H., & Ferreira, L.-A. R. (2004). What is a TOT? Cognate and translation effects on tip-of-the-tongue states in Spanish-English and tagalog-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(1), 246–269.
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Cera, C., & Sandoval, T. C. (2008). More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(3), 787–814.
Grainger, J., & Beauvillain, C. (1987). Language blocking and lexical access in bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A.
Green, D. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 67–81.
Guo, T., & Peng, D. (2006). Event-related potential evidence for parallel activation of two languages in bilingual speech production. Neuroreport, 17(17), 1757–1760.
Hallett, P. E. (1986). Eye movements. In K. R. Boff, L. I. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (p. 10.1–10.112). New York: Wiley.
Hanulová, J., Davidson, D. J., & Indefrey, P. (2011). Where does the delay in L2 picture naming come from? Psycholinguistic and neurocognitive evidence on second language word production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(7), 902–934.
Huettig, F., & McQueen, J. M. (2007). The tug of war between phonological, semantic, and shape information in language-mediated visual search. Journal of Memory and Language, 541, 460–482.
Jackson, G. M., Swainson, R., Cunnington, R., & Jackson, S. R. (2001). ERP correlates of executive control during repeated language switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(2), 169–178.
Jeong, H., Sugiura, M., Sassa, Y., Haji, T., Usui, N., Taira, M., … Kawashima, R. (2007). Effect of syntactic similarity on cortical activation during second language processing: A comparison of English and Japanese among native Korean trilinguals. Human Brain Mapping, 28(3), 194–204.
Ju, M., & Luce, P. (2004). Falling on Sensitive Ears: Constraints on Bilingual Lexical Activation. Psychological Science, 15(5), 314–318.
Klein, D., Watkins, K. E., Zatorre, R. J., & Milner, B. (2006). Word and nonword repetition in bilingual subjects: A PET study. Human Brain Mapping, 27(2), 153–161.
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, B., & Christensen, H. (2016). Tests in linear mixed effects models. Version 2.0.32.
Lagrou, E., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Duyck, W. (2013a). Interlingual competition in a spoken sentence context: Evidence from the visual world paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review2, 201, 963–972.
Lagrou, E., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Duyck, W. (2013b). The influence of sentence context and accented speech on lexical access in second-language auditory word recognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition2, 16(3), 508–517.
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 325–343.
Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2009). Bilingual lexical access in context: evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(2), 381–390.
Luce, P. A, & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19(1), 1–36.
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003). Bilingual and monolingual processing of competing lexical items. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(2), 173–193.
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003a). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(2), 97–115.
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003b). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(2), 97–115.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken. Cognition, 251, 71–102.
Martínez-García, M. T., Van Anne, K., Brown, R., & Tremblay, A. (n.d.). English and Spanish Listeners’ Use of “Positive” Stress cues in Spanish Word Recognition.
Martino, J., Brogna, C., Robles, S. G., Vergani, F., & Duffau, H. (2010). Anatomic dissection of the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus revisited in the lights of brain stimulation data. Cortex, 46(5), 691–699.
McClelland, J. L., Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE Model of Speech Perception. Cognitive Psychology, 181, 1–86.
Meuter, R. F. I., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual Language Switching in Naming : Asymmetrical Costs of Language Selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 401, 25–40.
Mirman, D., Dixon, J. A., & Magnuson, J. S. (2008). Statistical and computational models of the visual world paradigm: Growth curves and individual differences. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 475–494.
Mishra, R. K., & Singh, N. (2016). The influence of second language proficiency on bilingual parallel language activation in Hindi – English bilinguals. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 59111(April), 1–16.
Mohades, S. G., Struys, E., Van Schuerbeek, P., Mondt, K., Van De Craen, P., & Luypaert, R. (2012). DTI reveals structural differences in white matter tracts between bilingual and monolingual children. Brain Research, 14351, 72–80.
Monsell, S., Yeung, N., & Azuma, R. (2000). Reconfiguration of task-set: Is it easier to switch to the weaker task? Psychological Research, 631, 250–264.
Perani, D., Abutalebi, J., Paulesu, E., Brambati, S., Scifo, P., Cappa, S. F., & Fazio, F. (2003). The role of age of acquisition and language usage in early, high-proficient bilinguals: An fMRI study during verbal fluency. Human Brain Mapping, 19(3), 170–182.
Sancier, M. L., & Fowler, C. a. (1997). Gestural drift in a bilingual speaker of Brazilian Portuguese and English. Journal of Phonetics, 25(4), 421–436.
Schulpen, B., Dijkstra, T., Schriefers, H. J., & Hasper, M. (2003). Recognition of interlingual homophones in bilingual auditory word recognition. Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance (Vol. 291).
Schwartz, A. I., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Bilingual lexical activation in sentence context. Journal of Memory and Language2, 55(2), 197–212.
Seidenberg, M. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic Access of the Meanings of Ambiguous Words in Context : Some Limitations of Knowledge-Based Processing. Cognitive Psychology, 141, 489–537.
Silverberg, S., & Samuel, A. G. (2004). The effect of age of second language acquisition on the representation and processing of second language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(3), 381–398.
Soares, C., & Grosjean, F. (1984). Bilinguals in a monolingual and a bilingual speech mode: the effect on lexical access. Memory & Cognition, 12(4), 380–386.
Soto-Faraco, S., Sebastián-Galles, N., & Cutler, A. (2001). Segmental and suprasegmental mismatch in lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 451, 412–432.
Spivey, M. J., & Marian, V. (1999). Cross Talk Between Native and Second Languages: Partial Activation of an Irrelevant Lexicon. Psychological Science, 10(3), 281–284.
Tagliaferri, B. (2005). Paradigm. Perception Research Systems, Inc. Retrieved from [URL]
Titone, D., Libben, M., Mercier, J., Whitford, V., & Pivneva, I. (2011). Bilingual lexical access during L1 sentence reading: The effects of L2 knowledge, semantic constraint, and L1–L2 intermixing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(6), 1412–1431.
Towell, R., Hawkins, R., & Bazergui, N. (1996). The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 84–119.
Tremblay, A. (2008). Is second language lexical access prosodically constrained? Processing of word stress by French Canadian second language learners of English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 291, 553–584.
Tremblay, A., & Ransijn, J. (2015). Model selection and post-hoc analysis for (G)LMER Models. R software package.
Weber, A., & Cutler, A. (2004). Lexical competition in non-native spoken-word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 50(1), 1–25.
Weber, A., Melinger, A., Lara Tapia, L. (2007). The mapping of phonetic information to lexical representation in Spanish: Evidence from eye movements. In J. Trouvain & W. J. Barry (Eds.) Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2007). Dudweiler: Pirrot (pp. 1941–1944).
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Lijewska, Agnieszka & Robertus de Louw
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.