Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism: Online-First Articles

Facilitation for non-identical cognates in L3

The role of cross-language similarity and stimulus list composition

ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ORCID logo | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
In the present study we aimed to obtain with trilinguals the cognate inhibitory effects reported earlier for bilingual speakers who performed L2 lexical decision tasks (LDTs) with non-identical cognates and controls. To that end, Polish–English–Dutch trilinguals performed two LDTs in their L3. In Experiment 1, the stimuli included two types of double non-identical cognates Polish–Dutch (e.g., SMAK–SMAAK), and English–Dutch (e.g., BUTTER–BOTER) as well as matched non-cognate Dutch controls (e.g., JASJE). In Experiment 2, we tested triple non-identical cognates shared across Polish, English and Dutch (e.g., GRUPA–GROUP–GROEP) and Dutch controls (e.g., BROEK). We failed to find the bilingual inhibitory effects. In contrast, significant facilitation for English–Dutch and for Polish–English–Dutch cognates was found, even though no identical cognates were used. However, Polish–Dutch cognates yielded null results. The current findings emphasize the influence of the levels of form similarity on the observed cognate effects and point to the important role of stimulus list composition in cognate processing.
Keywords: non-identical cognate, trilingual, word recognition, stimulus list, cross-language similarity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Factors affecting cognate processing in bilinguals
  • 3.Factors affecting cognate processing in trilinguals
  • 4.The present study
    • 4.1Experiment 1
      • 4.1.1Participants
      • 4.1.2Materials
        • Orthographic analysis
        • Norming study
      • 4.1.3Procedure
      • 4.1.4Data selection and analysis
      • 4.1.5Results
    • 4.2Experiment 2
      • 4.2.1Participants
      • 4.2.2Materials
      • 4.2.3Procedure
      • 4.2.4Data selection and analysis
      • 4.2.5Results
  • 5.General discussion
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Declaration of conflicting interests
  • Data availability statement
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 13 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.21016.lij
References (69)
References
Aboh, E. O., & Parafita Couto, M. C. (2024). Modelling multilingual ecologies beyond the L1–L2 Binary: Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 14 (1), 37–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious Mixed Models. arXiv:1506.04967 [Stat]. [URL]
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanco-Elorrieta, E., & Pylkkänen, L. (2018). Ecological Validity in Bilingualism Research and the Bilingual Advantage. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22 (12), 1117–1126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M. (2019). How many participants do we have to include in properly powered experiments? A tutorial of power analysis with reference tables. Journal of Cognition, 2 (1), Article 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., Mandera, P., & Keuleers, E. (2016). The impact of word prevalence on lexical decision times: Evidence from the Dutch Lexicon Project 2. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42 (3), 441–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bultena, S., Dijkstra, T., & Van Hell, J. G. (2014). Cognate effects in sentence context depend on word class, L2 proficiency, and task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67 (6), 1214–1241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carrasco-Ortiz, H., Amengual, M., & Gries, S. Th. (2021). Cross-language effects of phonological and orthographic similarity in cognate word recognition: The role of language dominance. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11 (3), 389–417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comesaña, M., Coelho, R., Oliveira, H., & Paula Soares, A. (2018). How letter order is encoded in bilingual reading? The role of deviant-letter position in cognate word recognition. Speech, Language and Hearing, 21 (2), 90–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comesaña, M., Ferré, P., Romero, J., Guasch, M., Soares, A. P., & García-Chico, T. (2015). Facilitative effect of cognate words vanishes when reducing the orthographic overlap: The role of stimuli list composition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41 (3), 614–635. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comesaña, M., Haro, J., Macizo, P., & Ferré, P. (2021). Disentangling the Role of Deviant Letter Position on Cognate Word Processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 1, 4103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comesaña, M., Sánchez-Casas, R., Soares, A. P., Pinheiro, A. P., Rauber, A., Frade, S., & Fraga, I. (2012). The interplay of phonology and orthography in visual cognate word recognition: An ERP study. Neuroscience Letters, 529 (1), 75–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cop, U., Dirix, N., Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., & Duyck, W. (2017). Reading a book in one or two languages? An eye movement study of cognate facilitation in L1 and L2 reading. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20 (04), 747–769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cornut, C., Mahé, G., & Casalis, S. (2021). L2 word recognition in French-English late bilinguals: Does modality matter? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Costa, A. S., Comesaña, M., & Soares, A. P. (2022). PHOR-in-One: A multilingual lexical database with PHonological, ORthographic and PHonographic word similarity estimates in four languages. Behavior Research Methods. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T. (2003). Lexical processing in bilinguals and multilinguals: The word selection problem. In J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen, & U. Jessner (Eds.), The Multilingual lexicon (pp. 11–26). Kluwer Academic Publishers. [URL]. DOI logo
Dijkstra, T., Miwa, K., Brummelhuis, B., Sappelli, M., & Baayen, H. (2010). How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 62 (3), 284–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Peeters, D., Hieselaar, W., & Van Geffen, A. (2023). Orthographic and semantic priming effects in neighbour cognates: Experiments and simulations. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 26 (2), 371–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5 (03), 175–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Wahl, A., Buytenhuijs, F., Van Halem, N., Al-Jibouri, Z., De Korte, M., & Rekké, S. (2019). Multilink: A computational model for bilingual word recognition and word translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22 (4), 657–679. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duyck, W., Van Assche, E., & Hartsuiker, R. (2007). Visual word recognition by bilinguals in a sentence context: Evidence for nonselective lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33 (4), 663–679.Google Scholar
Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2010). An R Companion to Applied Regression (Second edition). SAGE Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
Frances, C., Navarra-Barindelli, E., & Martin, C. D. (2021). Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of phonological and orthographic similarity on L2 word recognition across modalities in bilinguals. Scientific Reports, 11 1, 12812. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gollan, T. H., & Ferreira, V. S. (2009). Should I stay or should I switch? A cost-benefit analysis of voluntary language switching in young and aging bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35 (3), 640–665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1 (2), 67–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoshino, N., & Kroll, J. F. (2008). Cognate effects in picture naming: Does cross-language activation survive a change of script? Cognition, 106 (1), 501–511. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iniesta, A., Rossi, E., Bajo, M. T., & Paolieri, D. (2021). The Influence of Cross-Linguistic Similarity and Language Background on Writing to Dictation. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 1. [URL]. DOI logo
Instantly Inc. (2008). Instant.ly [Computer software]. [URL]
Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42 (3), 627–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klimaszewska, Z., Morciniec, N., & Genis, R. (2009). Woordenboek Nederlands-Pools. Słownik niderlandzko-polski. Pegasus.Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2015). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82 (13). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauro, J., & Schwartz, A. I. (2017). Bilingual non-selective lexical access in sentence contexts: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Memory and Language, 92 1, 217–233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., Dijkstra, T., & Michel, M. C. (2004). Three languages, one ECHO: Cognate effects in trilingual word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19 (5), 585–611. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, P., Zhang, F., Tsai, E., & Puls, B. (2014). Language history questionnaire (LHQ 2.0): A new dynamic web-based research tool. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17 (3), 673–680. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Lijewska, A. (2020). Cognate processing effects in bilingual lexical access. In R. R. Heredia & A. B. Cieślicka (Eds.), Bilingual Lexical Ambiguity Resolution (pp. 71–95). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2023). The influence of semantic bias on triple non-identical cognates during reading: Evidence from trilinguals’ eye movements. Second Language Research. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lijewska, A., & Błaszkowska, H. (2021). Non-identical cognates yield facilitation in translation – does the way foreign vocabulary is learned affect its processing? Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 57 (3), 329–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lijewska, A., & Chmiel, A. (2015). Cognate facilitation in sentence context – translation production by interpreting trainees and non-interpreting trilinguals. International Journal of Multilingualism, 12 (3), 358–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lijewska, A., & de Louw, R. (2024, March 17). Facilitation for non-identical cognates in L3 – the role of cross-language similarity and stimulus list composition. Retrieved from [URL]
Martin, W. J. R., Tops, G. A. J., & Martin, W. J. R. (1999). Nederlands – Engels (Derde druk). Van Dale Lexicografie.Google Scholar
Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94 1, 305–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muscalu, L. M., & Smiley, P. A. (2019). The illusory benefit of cognates: Lexical facilitation followed by sublexical interference in a word typing task. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22 (4), 848–865. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2013). Masked translation priming with Japanese-English bilinguals: Interactions between cognate status, target frequency and L2 proficiency. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25 (8), 949–981. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Otwinowska, A. (2015). Cognate vocabulary in language acquisition and use. Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palma, P., Whitford, V., & Titone, D. (2020). Cross-language activation and executive control modulate within-language ambiguity resolution: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46 (3), 507–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petrescu, M. C., Helms-Park, R., & Dronjic, V. (2017). The impact of frequency and register on cognate facilitation: Comparing Romanian and Vietnamese speakers on the Vocabulary Levels Test. English for Specific Purposes, 47 1, 15–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poarch, G. J., & Van Hell, J. G. (2012). Cross-language activation in children’s speech production: Evidence from second language learners, bilinguals, and trilinguals. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111 (3), 419–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Cross-language activation in same-script and different-script trilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18 (6), 693–716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poort, E. D., & Rodd, J. M. (2017). The cognate facilitation effect in bilingual lexical decision is influenced by stimulus list composition. Acta Psychologica, 180 1, 52–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Puig-Mayenco, E., Chaouch-Orozco, A., Liu, H., & Martín-Villena, F. (2023). The LexTALE as a measure of L2 global proficiency: A cautionary tale based on a partial replication of Lemhöfer and Broersma (2012): Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 13 (3), 299–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2020). A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Schad, D. J., Vasishth, S., Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (2020). How to capitalize on a priori contrasts in linear (mixed) models: A tutorial. Journal of Memory and Language, 110 1, 104038. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schepens, J., Dijkstra, T., & Grootjen, F. (2012). Distributions of cognates in Europe as based on Levenshtein distance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15 (01), 157–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, A. I., Kroll, J. F., & Diaz, M. (2007). Reading words in Spanish and English: Mapping orthography to phonology in two languages. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22 (1), 106–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, A. I., & Tarin, K. S. (2021). The impact of a discourse context on bilingual cross-language lexical activation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24 (5), 879–890. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szubko-Sitarek, W. (2011). Cognate facilitation effects in trilingual word recognition. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1 (2), 189–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Multilingual Lexical Recognition in the Mental Lexicon of Third Language Users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tokowicz, N., Kroll, J. F., de Groot, A. M. B., & Van Hell, J. G. (2002). Number-of-translation norms for Dutch-English translation pairs: A new tool for examining language production. Behavior Research Methods, 34 (3), 435–451.Google Scholar
Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., Duyck, W., Welvaert, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). The influence of semantic constraints on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 64 (1), 88–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Assche, E., Duyck, W., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). Verb processing by bilinguals in sentence contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35 (02), 237–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9 (4), 780–789. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Heuven, W. J., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2014). SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67 (6), 1176–1190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vanlangendonck, F., Peeters, D., Rueschemeyer, S.-A., & Dijkstra, T. (2020). Mixing the stimulus list in bilingual lexical decision turns cognate facilitation effects into mirrored inhibition effects. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23 (4), 836–844. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Voga, M., & Grainger, J. (2007). Cognate status and cross-script translation priming. Memory & Cognition, 35 (5), 938–952. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Y., & Mok, P. P. K. (2020). Visual recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs in two non-native languages: Evidence from Asian adult trilinguals. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 10 (4), 441–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar