Pub Date : 2023-09-25DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000627
Ali Behzadnia, Signy Wegener, Audrey Bürki, Elisabeth Beyersmann
The present study asked whether oral vocabulary training can facilitate reading in a second language (L2). Fifty L2 speakers of English received oral training over three days on complex novel words, with predictable and unpredictable spellings, composed of novel stems and existing suffixes (i.e., vishing, vishes, vished). After training, participants read the novel word stems for the first time (i.e., trained and untrained), embedded in sentences, and their eye movements were monitored. The eye-tracking data revealed shorter looking times for trained than untrained stems, and for stems with predictable than unpredictable spellings. In contrast to monolingual speakers of English, the interaction between training and spelling predictability was not significant, suggesting that L2 speakers did not generate orthographic skeletons that were robust enough to affect their eye-movement behaviour when seeing the trained novel words for the first time in print.
{"title":"The role of oral vocabulary when L2 speakers read novel words: A complex word training study","authors":"Ali Behzadnia, Signy Wegener, Audrey Bürki, Elisabeth Beyersmann","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000627","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000627","url":null,"abstract":"The present study asked whether oral vocabulary training can facilitate reading in a second language (L2). Fifty L2 speakers of English received oral training over three days on complex novel words, with predictable and unpredictable spellings, composed of novel stems and existing suffixes (i.e., <jats:italic>vishing</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>vishes</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>vished</jats:italic>). After training, participants read the novel word stems for the first time (i.e., trained and untrained), embedded in sentences, and their eye movements were monitored. The eye-tracking data revealed shorter looking times for trained than untrained stems, and for stems with predictable than unpredictable spellings. In contrast to monolingual speakers of English, the interaction between training and spelling predictability was not significant, suggesting that L2 speakers did not generate orthographic skeletons that were robust enough to affect their eye-movement behaviour when seeing the trained novel words for the first time in print.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"8 28","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71435359","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-22DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000664
Camilla Masullo, Vittoria Dentella, Evelina Leivada
Abstract Being bilingual confers certain behavioral effects. Determining their precise origin is of utmost importance given the need to avoid unjust misattribution of labels such as “bilingual (dis)advantage” to people's bilingual experiences. To this end, this systematic PRISMA-based review aims to shed light on the social and sociolinguistic origins of bilingualism-related behavioral effects. Analyzing 368 studies, we find that 73.41% of the 267 studies that report such effects attribute them either to sociolinguistic factors alone or to the interaction of sociolinguistic and cognitive factors. Linking the two fronts, type of effect and origin of effect, we find a previously unreported correlation: Studies that find evidence for bilingual disadvantages are more likely to claim a sociolinguistic origin, while studies that report advantages are more likely to link their findings to a cognitive origin. We discuss these results and present the key components of a sociolinguistic theory of the origin of bilingual effects.
{"title":"73% of the observed bilingual (dis)advantageous effects on cognition stem from sociolinguistic factors: A systematic review","authors":"Camilla Masullo, Vittoria Dentella, Evelina Leivada","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000664","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Being bilingual confers certain behavioral effects. Determining their precise origin is of utmost importance given the need to avoid unjust misattribution of labels such as “bilingual (dis)advantage” to people's bilingual experiences. To this end, this systematic PRISMA-based review aims to shed light on the social and sociolinguistic origins of bilingualism-related behavioral effects. Analyzing 368 studies, we find that 73.41% of the 267 studies that report such effects attribute them either to sociolinguistic factors alone or to the interaction of sociolinguistic and cognitive factors. Linking the two fronts, type of effect and origin of effect, we find a previously unreported correlation: Studies that find evidence for bilingual disadvantages are more likely to claim a sociolinguistic origin, while studies that report advantages are more likely to link their findings to a cognitive origin. We discuss these results and present the key components of a sociolinguistic theory of the origin of bilingual effects.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136061042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-18DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000639
Jiuzhou Hao, Vasiliki Chondrogianni, Patrick Sturt
Previous research suggests that child HSs’ performance in offline linguistic tasks is typically worse than their age-matched monolingual peers and is modulated by linguistic and child-level factors. This study examined the comprehension and production of three Mandarin non-canonical structures in 5- to 9-year-old Mandarin–English heritage children and Mandarin-speaking monolingual children, including an online processing task. Results showed that heritage children had different performance in production and offline comprehension across structures compared to monolinguals. In online processing, they showed sensitivity to different cues similarly to monolinguals but took longer to revise initial misinterpretations. Within heritage children, we found that presence of morphosyntactic cues facilitated performance across tasks while cross-linguistic influence was only identified in production and offline comprehension but not in online processing. Additionally, input quantity predicted their production and offline comprehension accuracy of non-canonical structures, whereas age modulated their production. Lastly, online processing was not modulated by age nor input.
{"title":"Heritage language development and processing: Non-canonical word orders in Mandarin–English child heritage speakers","authors":"Jiuzhou Hao, Vasiliki Chondrogianni, Patrick Sturt","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000639","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000639","url":null,"abstract":"Previous research suggests that child HSs’ performance in offline linguistic tasks is typically worse than their age-matched monolingual peers and is modulated by linguistic and child-level factors. This study examined the comprehension and production of three Mandarin non-canonical structures in 5- to 9-year-old Mandarin–English heritage children and Mandarin-speaking monolingual children, including an online processing task. Results showed that heritage children had different performance in production and offline comprehension across structures compared to monolinguals. In online processing, they showed sensitivity to different cues similarly to monolinguals but took longer to revise initial misinterpretations. Within heritage children, we found that presence of morphosyntactic cues facilitated performance across tasks while cross-linguistic influence was only identified in production and offline comprehension but not in online processing. Additionally, input quantity predicted their production and offline comprehension accuracy of non-canonical structures, whereas age modulated their production. Lastly, online processing was not modulated by age nor input.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"8 23","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71435364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-11DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000640
Haerim Hwang
Contraction of want to to wanna is sometimes possible (e.g., Who do you want to/wanna stay with ___ ?), but sometimes impossible (e.g., Who do you want ___ to/*wanna stay?). This contrast is attributable to the grammatical constraint that a wh-trace blocks the contraction of want and to. Most first language (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition studies testing learner knowledge of this constraint have used elicited production tasks and focused on adult participants, with inconsistent results. Using a child-friendly acceptability judgment task, the current study shows that children as young as 3;11 and both child and adult L2 learners have target-like knowledge of the constraint on wanna contraction. This result is in line with the position that L1 acquisition, child L2 acquisition, and adult L2 acquisition are qualitatively similar.
{"title":"Wanna contraction in first language acquisition, child second language acquisition, and adult second language acquisition","authors":"Haerim Hwang","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000640","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000640","url":null,"abstract":"Contraction of <jats:italic>want to</jats:italic> to <jats:italic>wanna</jats:italic> is sometimes possible (e.g., <jats:italic>Who do you want to/wanna stay with ___ ?</jats:italic>), but sometimes impossible (e.g., <jats:italic>Who do you want ___ to/*wanna stay?</jats:italic>). This contrast is attributable to the grammatical constraint that a <jats:italic>wh</jats:italic>-trace blocks the contraction of <jats:italic>want</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>to</jats:italic>. Most first language (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition studies testing learner knowledge of this constraint have used elicited production tasks and focused on adult participants, with inconsistent results. Using a child-friendly acceptability judgment task, the current study shows that children as young as 3;11 and both child and adult L2 learners have target-like knowledge of the constraint on <jats:italic>wanna</jats:italic> contraction. This result is in line with the position that L1 acquisition, child L2 acquisition, and adult L2 acquisition are qualitatively similar.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"8 15","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71435148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-09-08DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000597
Lyam M. Bailey, Kate Lockary, Eve Higby
For bilinguals, lexical access in one language may affect, or be affected by, activation of words in another language. Research to date suggests seemingly contradictory effects of such cross-linguistic influence (CLI): in some cases CLI facilitates lexical access while in others it is a hindrance. Here we provide a comprehensive review of CLI effects drawn from multiple disciplines and paradigms. We describe the contexts within which CLI gives rise to facilitation and interference and suggest that these two general effects arise from separate mechanisms that are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, we argue that facilitation is ubiquitous, occurring in virtually all instances of CLI, while interference is not always present and depends on levels of cross-language lexical competition. We discuss three critical factors – language context, direction, and modality of CLI – which appear to modulate facilitation and interference. Overall, we hope to provide a general framework for investigating CLI in future research.
{"title":"Cross-linguistic influence in the bilingual lexicon: Evidence for ubiquitous facilitation and context-dependent interference effects on lexical processing","authors":"Lyam M. Bailey, Kate Lockary, Eve Higby","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000597","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000597","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 For bilinguals, lexical access in one language may affect, or be affected by, activation of words in another language. Research to date suggests seemingly contradictory effects of such cross-linguistic influence (CLI): in some cases CLI facilitates lexical access while in others it is a hindrance. Here we provide a comprehensive review of CLI effects drawn from multiple disciplines and paradigms. We describe the contexts within which CLI gives rise to facilitation and interference and suggest that these two general effects arise from separate mechanisms that are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, we argue that facilitation is ubiquitous, occurring in virtually all instances of CLI, while interference is not always present and depends on levels of cross-language lexical competition. We discuss three critical factors – language context, direction, and modality of CLI – which appear to modulate facilitation and interference. Overall, we hope to provide a general framework for investigating CLI in future research.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42042113","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-31DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000536
Leigh B. Fernandez, Christoph Scheepers, S. Allen
In a recent study, Fernandez et al. (2021) investigated parafoveal processing in L1 English and L1 German–L2 English readers using the gaze contingent boundary paradigm (Rayner, 1975). Unexpectedly, L2 readers derived an interference from a non-cognate translation parafoveal mask (arrow vs. pfeil), but derived a benefit from a German orthographic parafoveal mask (arrow vs. pfexk) when reading in English. The authors argued that bilingual readers incurred a switching cost from the complete German word, and derived a benefit by keeping both lexicons active from the partial German word. In this registered report, we further test this finding with L1 German–L2 English participants using improved items, but with the sentences presented in German. We were able to replicate the non-cognate translation interference but not the orthographic facilitation. Follow up comparisons showed that all parafoveal masks evoked similar inhibition, suggesting that bilingual readers do not process non-cognate semantic or orthographic information parafoveally.
{"title":"Cross-language semantic and orthographic parafoveal processing by bilingual L1 German–L2 English readers","authors":"Leigh B. Fernandez, Christoph Scheepers, S. Allen","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000536","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000536","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In a recent study, Fernandez et al. (2021) investigated parafoveal processing in L1 English and L1 German–L2 English readers using the gaze contingent boundary paradigm (Rayner, 1975). Unexpectedly, L2 readers derived an interference from a non-cognate translation parafoveal mask (arrow vs. pfeil), but derived a benefit from a German orthographic parafoveal mask (arrow vs. pfexk) when reading in English. The authors argued that bilingual readers incurred a switching cost from the complete German word, and derived a benefit by keeping both lexicons active from the partial German word. In this registered report, we further test this finding with L1 German–L2 English participants using improved items, but with the sentences presented in German. We were able to replicate the non-cognate translation interference but not the orthographic facilitation. Follow up comparisons showed that all parafoveal masks evoked similar inhibition, suggesting that bilingual readers do not process non-cognate semantic or orthographic information parafoveally.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48015171","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-31DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000615
Simin Meykadeh, A. Golfam, S. A. Batouli, W. Sommer
No studies have investigated the neural correlates of Number and Person agreement processing in bilinguals. Because a previous fMRI study showed difference in L1 and L2 morphosyntactic processing of L1 Turkish–L2 Persian bilinguals, it was of interest whether this difference can be specifically attributed to Number or Person processing. Therefore, we reanalyzed these data at the whole-brain level, revealing a selective response for Number Violations in the pars opercularis (PO), whereas Number and Person Violations activated the posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG). These results support the decomposition of agreement projections and their neuroanatomical substrates in bilinguals and confirm the involvement of systematically different feature-checking and feature-mapping mechanisms in Number and Person agreement but shared mechanisms between L1 and L2. Moreover, at variance with previous reports, Number Violations evoked more effects than Person Violations in pSTG, suggesting qualitatively different processing underlying R-expression and pronominal controllers.
{"title":"The neural basis of Number and Person phi-features processing: An fMRI study in highly proficient bilinguals","authors":"Simin Meykadeh, A. Golfam, S. A. Batouli, W. Sommer","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000615","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 No studies have investigated the neural correlates of Number and Person agreement processing in bilinguals. Because a previous fMRI study showed difference in L1 and L2 morphosyntactic processing of L1 Turkish–L2 Persian bilinguals, it was of interest whether this difference can be specifically attributed to Number or Person processing. Therefore, we reanalyzed these data at the whole-brain level, revealing a selective response for Number Violations in the pars opercularis (PO), whereas Number and Person Violations activated the posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG). These results support the decomposition of agreement projections and their neuroanatomical substrates in bilinguals and confirm the involvement of systematically different feature-checking and feature-mapping mechanisms in Number and Person agreement but shared mechanisms between L1 and L2. Moreover, at variance with previous reports, Number Violations evoked more effects than Person Violations in pSTG, suggesting qualitatively different processing underlying R-expression and pronominal controllers.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43054402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-25DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000500
Teresa Gray, Julia Palevich, Chaleece W. Sandberg
BAbSANT (Bilingual Abstract Semantic Associative Network Training) is a novel, theoretically motivated approach to anomia therapy for bilingual persons with aphasia (BPWA). We report on a Russian-dominant, Russian–English BPWA, who was trained on abstract English and Russian words. We hypothesized both within- and cross-language generalization when the non-dominant language was trained, and only within-language generalization when the dominant language was trained. We also hypothesized that cross-language generalization is modulated by nonverbal cognitive control. Results revealed that when English abstract words were trained, within-language generalization to concrete words and cross-language generalization to Russian abstract words was observed, confirming our first hypothesis. However, our second hypothesis was not confirmed. When Russian was trained, direct effects of treatment and within- or cross-language generalization effects were not observed. Our third hypothesis was confirmed. Results from cognitive control tasks from this individual suggest a role of nonverbal cognitive control on cross-language treatment outcomes.
{"title":"Bilingual Abstract Semantic Associative Network Training (BAbSANT): A Russian–English case study","authors":"Teresa Gray, Julia Palevich, Chaleece W. Sandberg","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000500","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000500","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 BAbSANT (Bilingual Abstract Semantic Associative Network Training) is a novel, theoretically motivated approach to anomia therapy for bilingual persons with aphasia (BPWA). We report on a Russian-dominant, Russian–English BPWA, who was trained on abstract English and Russian words. We hypothesized both within- and cross-language generalization when the non-dominant language was trained, and only within-language generalization when the dominant language was trained. We also hypothesized that cross-language generalization is modulated by nonverbal cognitive control. Results revealed that when English abstract words were trained, within-language generalization to concrete words and cross-language generalization to Russian abstract words was observed, confirming our first hypothesis. However, our second hypothesis was not confirmed. When Russian was trained, direct effects of treatment and within- or cross-language generalization effects were not observed. Our third hypothesis was confirmed. Results from cognitive control tasks from this individual suggest a role of nonverbal cognitive control on cross-language treatment outcomes.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45454747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-15DOI: 10.1017/s136672892300055x
E.K.A. Koutamanis, G. Kootstra, T. Dijkstra, S. Unsworth
In a between-language lexical priming study, we examined to what extent the two languages in a simultaneous bilingual child's lexicon interact, while taking individual differences in language exposure into account. Primary-school-aged Dutch–Greek bilinguals performed a primed picture selection task combined with eye-tracking. They matched pictures to auditorily presented Dutch target words preceded by Greek prime words. Their reaction times and eye movements were recorded. We tested for effects of between-language phonological priming, translation priming, and phonological priming through translation. Priming effects emerged in reaction times and eye movements in all three conditions, at different stages of processing, and unaffected by language exposure. These results extend previous findings for bilingual toddlers and bilingual adults. Processing similarities between these populations indicate that, across different stages of development, bilinguals have an integrated lexicon that is accessed in a language-nonselective way and is susceptible to interactions within and between different types of lexical representation.
{"title":"Cross-linguistic influence in the simultaneous bilingual child's lexicon: An eye-tracking and primed picture selection study","authors":"E.K.A. Koutamanis, G. Kootstra, T. Dijkstra, S. Unsworth","doi":"10.1017/s136672892300055x","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s136672892300055x","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In a between-language lexical priming study, we examined to what extent the two languages in a simultaneous bilingual child's lexicon interact, while taking individual differences in language exposure into account. Primary-school-aged Dutch–Greek bilinguals performed a primed picture selection task combined with eye-tracking. They matched pictures to auditorily presented Dutch target words preceded by Greek prime words. Their reaction times and eye movements were recorded. We tested for effects of between-language phonological priming, translation priming, and phonological priming through translation. Priming effects emerged in reaction times and eye movements in all three conditions, at different stages of processing, and unaffected by language exposure. These results extend previous findings for bilingual toddlers and bilingual adults. Processing similarities between these populations indicate that, across different stages of development, bilinguals have an integrated lexicon that is accessed in a language-nonselective way and is susceptible to interactions within and between different types of lexical representation.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"57458343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-09DOI: 10.1017/s1366728923000548
T. Ishida
This study investigated whether non-native English speakers showed a processing advantage for high-frequency multiword units (multiword frequency effects), and whether the effects differed between native and non-native speakers. Such a difference has been identified in relation to single-word processing. Native English speakers and intermediate learners of English with languages of different scripts (native speakers of Japanese and German) judged whether English multiword units were grammatical. A significant processing advantage was identified for both native and non-native participants. More importantly, the multiword frequency effects were stronger among non-native than native speakers. The discrepancy persisted even after including individual vocabulary knowledge as a predictor in the mixed-effect models. Furthermore, there was no significant different impact of the effects between two non-native groups, even though German participants responded quicker than Japanese participants. This indicates that the varying influence between L1 and L2 could be explained by within-language, not between-language, variables.
{"title":"Are multiword frequency effects stronger in non-native than in native speakers?","authors":"T. Ishida","doi":"10.1017/s1366728923000548","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1366728923000548","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This study investigated whether non-native English speakers showed a processing advantage for high-frequency multiword units (multiword frequency effects), and whether the effects differed between native and non-native speakers. Such a difference has been identified in relation to single-word processing. Native English speakers and intermediate learners of English with languages of different scripts (native speakers of Japanese and German) judged whether English multiword units were grammatical. A significant processing advantage was identified for both native and non-native participants. More importantly, the multiword frequency effects were stronger among non-native than native speakers. The discrepancy persisted even after including individual vocabulary knowledge as a predictor in the mixed-effect models. Furthermore, there was no significant different impact of the effects between two non-native groups, even though German participants responded quicker than Japanese participants. This indicates that the varying influence between L1 and L2 could be explained by within-language, not between-language, variables.","PeriodicalId":8758,"journal":{"name":"Bilingualism: Language and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2023-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49195268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：