Article published in:
Psycholinguistic approaches to production and comprehension in bilingual adults and children
Edited by Maialen Iraola Azpiroz, Shanley E.M. Allen, Kalliopi Katsika and Leigh Fernandez
[Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9:4/5] 2019
► pp. 569–599

Bilingual reference production

A cognitive-computational account

| Universität Hamburg
| Universität zu Köln
| University of Cambridge
We investigate reference production in bilingual children. Based on Kibrik (2011), we analyze the production of referring expressions in discourse in terms of activation of a referent. We propose a novel approach, which calculates activation by taking into account different activation-lending factors and their respective weight. This allows us to compare the activation encoded by referring expressions across languages and groups of speakers, and to run correlational analyses with the speakers’ cognitive profiles. In particular, the study addresses the correlation between activation and lexical processing among bilinguals, based on the distribution of referring expressions in narratives by 20 German-Greek bilingual children, compared to their monolingual peers. We found that bilingual pronouns correspond to a lower activation than monolingual ones. Speed of lexical retrieval is a predictor of the bilingual performance. Our model of analysis accounts for how reference production varies across individuals and which cognitive mechanisms underlie this variation.
Keywords: reference production, activation, under- and over-specific referring expressions
Published online: 09 October 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.17026.tor
References

References

Almor, A.
(1999) Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106(4), 748–765. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andreou, M., Knopp, E., Bongartz, C., & Tsimpli, I.
(2015) Character reference in Greek-German bilingual children’s narratives. In L. Roberts (Ed.), EUROSLA Yearbook 16. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ariel, M.
(1990) Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Arnold, J.
(2010) How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. Language and Linguistic Compass, 4(4), 187–203. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & Goodman, J. C.
(1997) On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon: Evidence from acquisition, aphasia, and real-time processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 507–584. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A.
(2007) Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G.
(2008) Cognitive control and lexical access in younger and older bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 859–873.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K., & Yang, S.
(2010) Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(2), 397–401. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bittner, D., & Kuehnast, M.
(2012) Comprehension of intersentential pronouns in child German and child Bulgarian. First Language, 32(1–2), 176–204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blumenfeld, H. H., & Marian, V.
(2007) Constraints on parallel activation in bilingual spoken language processing: Examining proficiency and lexical status using eye-tracking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(5), 633–660. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bosch, P., Rozario, T., & Zhao, Y.
(2003) Demonstrative pronouns and personal pronouns. German der vs. er. In: Proceedings of the EACL2003. Budapest. Workshop on The Computational Treatment of Anaphora.Google Scholar
Bongartz, C., & Torregrossa, J.
(2017) The effects of balanced biliteracy on Greek-German bilingual children’s secondary discourse ability. Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Burzio, L.
(1998) Anaphora and soft constraints. In P. Barbosa, D. Fox, P. Hagstrom, M. McGinnis & D. Pesetsky (Eds.), Is the best good enough? Optimality and competition in syntax (pp. 93–114). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Carminati, M. N.
(2002) The processing of Italian subject pronouns. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
De Cat, C., & Serratrice, L.
submitted). Predicting language proficiency in bilingual children. Retrieved from osf​.io​/wkgv7 on 21.03.2017. Crossref
Diessel, H.
(1999) Demonstratives. Form, function, and grammaticalization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & Van Heuven, W. J. B.
(1999) Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 496–518. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dimitriadis, A.
(1995) When pro-drop languages don’t: On overt pronominal subjects in Greek. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 2(2), 45–60.Google Scholar
Duyck, W., Vanderelst, D., Desmet, T., & Hartsuiker, R. J.
(2008) The frequency effect in second-language visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15(4), 850–855. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferrand, L., & New, B.
(2003) Syllabic length effects in visual word recognition and naming. Acta Psychologica, 113, 167–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gagarina, N.
(2016) Narratives of Russian-German preschool and primary school bilinguals: Rasskaz and Erzaehlung . Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(1), 91–122. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Givón, T.
(Ed.) (1983) Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C., & Morris, S. K.
(2005) Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory and Cognition, 33, 1220–1234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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, 787–814. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., & Witten, I. H.
(2009) The WEKA Data Mining Software: An Update; SIGKDD Explorations 11(1). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, P.
(2014) Asymmetries between language production and comprehension. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, Vol.42. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Cognitive modeling of individual variation in reference production and comprehension, Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, P., Koster, C., & Hoeks, J. C. J.
(2014) Referential choice across the lifespan: Why children and elderly adults produce ambiguous pronouns. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29, 391–407. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Iraola Azpiroz, M.
(2015) Anaphora resolution in children and adults: An experimental study of mature speakers and learners of Basque. Tübingen: Günther Narr-Verlag.Google Scholar
Jescheniak, J. D., Schriefers, H., & Hantsch, A.
(2001) Semantic and phonological activation in noun and pronoun production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 1058–1078.Google Scholar
Jüngling, N., & Lenhard, W.
(2006) Aktualisierter Schreibwortschatz von Grundschulkindern. Universität Würzburg, Unveröffentlichter Datensatz.Google Scholar
Kang, J. Y.
(2004) Telling a coherent story in a foreign language: analysis of Korean EFL learners- referential strategies in oral narrative discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1975–1990. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kibrik, A.
(2011) Reference in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leclercq, P., & Lenart, E.
(2013) Discourse cohesion and accessibility of referents in oral narratives: A comparison of L1 and L2 acquisition of French and English. Discours, 12, 3–31.Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Dijkstra, A.
(2004) Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs: Effects of code similarity in generalized lexical decision. Memory and Cognition, 32(4), 533–550. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B.
(2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk, 3rd Edition. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Marinis, T.
(2010) Using on-line processing methods in language acquisition research. In S. Unsworth & E. Blom (Eds.), Experimental methods in language acquisition research (pp. 139–162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Miltsakaki, E.
(2001) Centering in Greek. In Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Montrul, S.
(2004) Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 125–142. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Papadopoulou, D., Peristeri, E., Plemenou, E., Marinis, T., & Tsimpli, I.
(2015) Pronoun ambiguity resolution in Greek: Evidence from monolingual adults and children. Lingua, 155, 98–120. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Petermann, F., Fröhlich, L. P., & Metz, D.
(2010) SET 5–10. Sprachstandserhebung für Kinder im Alter von 5–10 Jahren. Göttingen et al.: Hochgrefe.Google Scholar
Protopapas, A., Tzakosta, M., Chalamandaris, A., & Tsiakoulis, P.
(2012) IPLR: An online resource for Greek word-level and sublexical information. Language Resources and Evaluation, 46(3), 449–459. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ransdell, S. E., & Fischler, I.
(1987) Memory in a monolingual mode: When are bilinguals at a disadvantage? Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 392–405. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H.
(1998) Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 2: The coloured progressive matrices. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment. Kinder im Alter von 5–10 Jahren. Göttingen et al.: Hochgrefe.Google Scholar
Rosa, E. C., & Arnold, J. E.
(2011) The role of attention in choice of referring expressions. In L. Carlson, C. Hoelscher & T. F. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Rosselli, M., Ardila, A., Araujo, K., Weekes, V. A., Caracciolo, V., Padilla, M., & Ostrosky-Solis, F.
(2000) Verbal fluency and repetition skills in healthy older Spanish-English bilinguals. Applied Neuropsychology, 7, 17–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, P., Dubé, R. V., & Hayward, D.
(2005) The Edmonton Narrative Norms Instrument. Retrieved [23.08.2013] from University of Alberta Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine website: http://​www​.rehabresearch​.ualberta​.ca​/enni
Serratrice, L.
(2007) Referential cohesion in the narratives of bilingual English-Italian children and monolingual peers. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 1058–1087. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., & Paoli, S.
(2004) Cross-linguistic influence at the syntax-pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English-Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(3), 183–205. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A.
(2011a) Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011b) Cognitive advantages in bilingualism: Is there a ‘bilingual paradox’? In P. Valore (Ed.), Multilingualism. Language, power, and knowledge (pp. 335–358). Pisa: Edistudio.Google Scholar
(2016) Referring expressions and executive functions in bilingualism. In I. Sekerina, & L. Spradlin (Eds.), Bilingualism and executive function: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 669–684). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Torregrossa, J.
(2017) The role of executive functions in the acquisition of reference: The production of demonstrative pronouns by German monolingual children. In J. Choi, H. Demirdache, O. Lungu & L. Voeltzel (Eds.), Language acquisition at the interfaces: Proceedings of GALA 2015 (pp. 316–330). New Castle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Torregrossa, J., Bongartz, C., & Tsimpli, I.
(2015) Testing accessibility: A cross-linguistic comparison of the syntax of referring expressions. In Proceedings of the 89th Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Portland. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Torregrossa, J., & Bongartz, C.
(2018) Teasing apart the effects of dominance, transfer, and processing in reference production by German-Italian bilingual adolescents. Languages, 3(36). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
to appear). Activation of referents in the bilingual mind. In G. Fotiadou & I. M. Tsimpli Eds. Individual difference in anaphora resolution: Language and cognitive effects Amsterdam John Benjamins
Torregrossa, J., Andreou, M., Bongartz, C., & Tsimpli, I.
(2017) Pinning down the role of type of bilingualism in the development of referential strategies. Paper presented at the Generative Linguistics in the Old World (GLOW40), Leiden 14.032017.Google Scholar
Treffers-Daller, J., & Rogers, V.
(2014) Grammatical patterns and the L2 lexicon. In J. Milton & T. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Dimensions of vocabulary knowledge (pp. 106–122). London: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, I. M., & Sorace, A.
(2006) Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. In D. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia & C. Zaller, BUCLD 30: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 653–664). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Vogindroukas, I., Protopapas, A., & Sideridis, G.
(2009) Expressive vocabulary test [Greek version of Renfrew Word Finding Vocabulary Test]. Chania, Crete: Glafki.Google Scholar
Wiltschko, M.
(1998) On the syntax and semantics of (relative) pronouns and determiners. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 2, 143–181. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Azpiroz, Maialen Iraola, Shanley E. M. Allen, Kalliopi Katsika & Leigh Fernandez
2019. Psycholinguistic approaches to production and comprehension in bilingual adults and children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9:4-5 ► pp. 505 ff. Crossref logo
Tsimpli, Ianthi Maria, Margreet Vogelzang, Anusha Balasubramanian, Theodoros Marinis, Suvarna Alladi, Abhigna Reddy & Minati Panda
2020. Linguistic Diversity, Multilingualism, and Cognitive Skills: A Study of Disadvantaged Children in India. Languages 5:1 ► pp. 10 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 08 january 2021. 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.