双语研究中的单语比较规范性失控:争论与替代

IF 2.4 2区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Applied Psycholinguistics Pub Date : 2022-11-11 DOI:10.1017/S0142716422000315
J. Rothman, F. Bayram, V. DeLuca, Grazia Di Pisa, J. Duñabeitia, Khadijeh Gharibi, Jiuzhou Hao, Nadine Kolb, Maki Kubota, T. Kupisch, T. Laméris, Alicia Luque, Brechje van Osch, S. M. Pereira Soares, Yanina Prystauka, D. Tat, Aleksandra Tomić, T. Voits, Stefanie Wulff
{"title":"双语研究中的单语比较规范性失控:争论与替代","authors":"J. Rothman, F. Bayram, V. DeLuca, Grazia Di Pisa, J. Duñabeitia, Khadijeh Gharibi, Jiuzhou Hao, Nadine Kolb, Maki Kubota, T. Kupisch, T. Laméris, Alicia Luque, Brechje van Osch, S. M. Pereira Soares, Yanina Prystauka, D. Tat, Aleksandra Tomić, T. Voits, Stefanie Wulff","doi":"10.1017/S0142716422000315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.","PeriodicalId":48065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psycholinguistics","volume":"44 1","pages":"316 - 329"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives\",\"authors\":\"J. Rothman, F. Bayram, V. DeLuca, Grazia Di Pisa, J. Duñabeitia, Khadijeh Gharibi, Jiuzhou Hao, Nadine Kolb, Maki Kubota, T. Kupisch, T. Laméris, Alicia Luque, Brechje van Osch, S. M. Pereira Soares, Yanina Prystauka, D. Tat, Aleksandra Tomić, T. Voits, Stefanie Wulff\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0142716422000315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Psycholinguistics\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"316 - 329\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Psycholinguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716422000315\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psycholinguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716422000315","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

摘要在本文中,我们将语境化、问题化,并为在双语(心理)语言学研究中超越单语比较规范性问题提供一些见解。我们认为,在绝大多数情况下,将(功能性)单语与双语并列并不能提供比较的目的:符合科学方法的经验控制标准。相反,单语比较规范性的默认性质在历史上造成了双语研究的许多方面的不平等,并继续阻碍多个层面的进展。除了阐述我们对这一问题的看法外,我们还为这一标准实践提供了一些认识论考虑和方法论替代方案,以提高经验的严谨性,同时促进我们领域的多样性、包容性和公平性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives
Abstract Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.80%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Applied Psycholinguistics publishes original research papers on the psychological processes involved in language. It examines language development , language use and language disorders in adults and children with a particular emphasis on cross-language studies. The journal gathers together the best work from a variety of disciplines including linguistics, psychology, reading, education, language learning, speech and hearing, and neurology. In addition to research reports, theoretical reviews will be considered for publication as will keynote articles and commentaries.
期刊最新文献
Does perceptual high variability phonetic training improve L2 speech production? A meta-analysis of perception-production connection You might want to tone down your advice: An experimental investigation of the speech act of advice in French What contributes to fluent L2 speech? Examining cognitive and utterance fluency link with underlying L2 collocational processing speed and accuracy Language anxiety does not affect the growth of L2 reading achievement: The latent growth curve model approach Shared representations in cognate comprehension and production: An online picture naming and lexical decision study with bilingual children
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1