TABLE 4 - uploaded by Mitsuhiko Ota
Content may be subject to copyright.
Mean percentage of errors and mean response latencies (standard error of the mean in parentheses) in each condition of Experiment 2 (Japanese-English bilinguals)
Source publication
A visual semantic categorization task in English was performed by native English speakers (Experiments 1) and bilinguals whose first language was Japanese (Experiments 2) or Spanish (Experiment 3). In the critical conditions, the target word was a homophone of a correct category exemplar (e.g., A BODY OF WATER – SEE) or a word that differed from th...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... exclusions, there remained 165 errors (18.4%) in 896 responses. As predicted, errors were more common in the experimental condition than in the corresponding spelling control condition in all critical contrasts (Table 4) ...
Context 2
... bottom panel of Table 4 shows the mean response latency for each contrast. The reaction time analysis excluded observations that were errors (18.4%) or outliers (2.7%), resulting in 707 remaining observations. ...
Similar publications
It is well established that in masked priming, a target word (e.g., JUDGE) is primed more effectively by a transposed letter (TL) prime (e.g., jugde) than by an orthographic control prime (e.g., junpe). This is inconsistent with the slot coding schemes used in many models of visual word recognition. Several alternative coding schemes have been prop...
Citations
... This may also partially explain why L2 phonology is fuzzy, especially for late bilinguals (c.f. Ota et al., 2009Ota et al., , 2010 The cross-language phonological priming effect benefits from shared phonological representations at the sublexical level. The activated sublexical phonological information in primes facilitates the recognition of target in the other language. ...
This study investigated the hypothesis of non-selective access to phonological representations in an integrated lexicon across logographic and alphabetic writing systems among Chinese L1 (first language) - English L2 (second language) bilinguals. We employed three experiments to test this hypothesis, including a lexical decision task (LDT) and a word naming task in Experiments 1 and 2 using the masked priming paradigm, and a self-paced sentence reading task in Experiment 3. Results from the LDT and word naming tasks showed a significant homophone priming effect from L1 to L2, but not from L2 to L1. In the sentence reading task, we compared processing time between homophone error words and control words in the critical and spill-over regions. A slower processing effect in the homophone condition was observed in the spill-over region. Overall, these findings suggest that phonological priming occurs across a logographic and an alphabetic script in different tasks, whether reading isolated words or sentences. Bilingual reading involves an integrated bilingual lexicon that is independent of script similarity.
... For instance, the triangle model (Seidenberg and McClelland, 1989;Harm and Seidenberg, 2004) suggests a cooperation between orthography and phonology to read words. Nevertheless, exposure to the phonology of both languages can lead to cross-linguistic interferences between first language (L1) and second language (L2; Akamatsu, 2003;Lemhöfer et al., 2008;Sun-Alperin and Wang, 2008;Deacon et al., 2009;Ota et al., 2010;Howard et al., 2012;Bhide, 2015). As posited by the language non-selective lexical access hypothesis (Dijkstra and van Heuven, 2002), lexical and sublexical information from both languages is coactivated during word reading. ...
... The strength of these influences Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org depend on variables like exposure (Brysbaert et al., 2017), amount of use (Flege et al., 1997;Luk and Bialystok, 2013), proficiency in L1, L2, or both languages (Haigh and Jared, 2007;Van Hell and Tanner, 2012), age (Howard et al., 2012), and the specific orthography (Beauvillain, 1992;Bialystok et al., 2005a;Hamada and Koda, 2008;Lemhöfer et al., 2008;Sun-Alperin and Wang, 2008;Ota et al., 2010;Lallier and Carreiras, 2018) and phonology (Sun-Alperin and Wang, 2008;Ota et al., 2009Ota et al., , 2010 of the L1 and L2 languages. Confusion between decoding rules (e.g., reading an English word by applying Spanish phonological rules) is likely to influence bilingual readers when the languages differ in terms of orthographic depth (Goswami et al., 1998). ...
... The strength of these influences Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org depend on variables like exposure (Brysbaert et al., 2017), amount of use (Flege et al., 1997;Luk and Bialystok, 2013), proficiency in L1, L2, or both languages (Haigh and Jared, 2007;Van Hell and Tanner, 2012), age (Howard et al., 2012), and the specific orthography (Beauvillain, 1992;Bialystok et al., 2005a;Hamada and Koda, 2008;Lemhöfer et al., 2008;Sun-Alperin and Wang, 2008;Ota et al., 2010;Lallier and Carreiras, 2018) and phonology (Sun-Alperin and Wang, 2008;Ota et al., 2009Ota et al., , 2010 of the L1 and L2 languages. Confusion between decoding rules (e.g., reading an English word by applying Spanish phonological rules) is likely to influence bilingual readers when the languages differ in terms of orthographic depth (Goswami et al., 1998). ...
Children learning to read in two different orthographic systems are exposed to cross-linguistic interferences. We explored the effects of school (Monolingual, Bilingual) and grade (2nd, 4th, and 6th) on phonological activation during a visual word recognition task. Elementary school children from Spain completed a lexical decision task in English. The task included real words and pseudohomophones following Spanish or English phonological rules. Using the mouse-tracking paradigm, we analyzed errors, reaction times, and computer mouse movements. Children in the bilingual school performed better than children in the monolingual school. Children in higher grades performed better than children in lower grades. The interference effect of Spanish phonology was weak and became weaker in higher grades. Spanish children differentiate between first and second language grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences since early on in the educational process. In 6th grade, children from the bilingual school responded better to words and Spanish pseudohomophones, while children from the monolingual school were less distracted by the English pseudohomophones. Children in the bilingual school had stronger inhibition of Spanish (L1) phonology and stronger activation of English (L2) phonology. Instructional method plays an important role on the processing strategies Spanish children rely on when reading in English. School and grade influence the link between orthographic and phonological representations.
... While the main tenets of the FLR primarily concern spoken word encoding, fuzzy form-meaning mappings were also reported in experiments that involved no auditory input. A visual semantic-relatedness decision task (Ota et al., 2009) and a visual semantic categorization task (Ota et al., 2010) showed the effects of fuzzy phonological encoding which led to uncertainty regarding orthographic encoding of L2 words on the processing of L2 word meanings. The observation that incorrect semantic associations for English words, such as key and rock, emerged in the responses of L1 Japanese speakers who experience encoding problems with the /r/-/l/ contrast lends support to the idea that the LRs of rock and lock were fuzzy and not sufficiently separated in the mental lexicon. ...
... The observation that incorrect semantic associations for English words, such as key and rock, emerged in the responses of L1 Japanese speakers who experience encoding problems with the /r/-/l/ contrast lends support to the idea that the LRs of rock and lock were fuzzy and not sufficiently separated in the mental lexicon. Crucially, while fuzzy phonological encoding is a result of perceptual categorization problems, auditory perception during the task completion could not be directly responsible for the semantic confusions reported by Ota et al. (2009Ota et al. ( , 2010. Accordingly, the results of the study speak in favor of FLRs being responsible for the confusions. ...
... While it is indeed impossible to determine whether the tasks using spoken words as input show the effects of lexical encoding of stored LRs, or online processing difficulties, or both, several data sets point to the unique contribution of the properties of stored LRs to the observed effects. These data sets, discussed above, rely on cross-modal priming that is argued to engage central representations rather than access representations (e.g., Broersma, 2012) and on semantic relatedness and categorization tasks that use visually presented words with underlying confusable phonological contrasts (Ota et al., 2009(Ota et al., , 2010. ...
We propose the fuzzy lexical representations (FLRs) hypothesis that regards fuzziness as a core property of nonnative (L2) lexical representations (LRs). Fuzziness refers to imprecise encoding at different levels of LRs and interacts with input frequency during lexical processing and learning in adult L2 speakers. The FLR hypothesis primarily focuses on the encoding of spoken L2 words. We discuss the causes of fuzzy encoding of phonological form and meaning as well as fuzzy form-meaning mappings and the consequences of fuzzy encoding for word storage and retrieval. A central factor contributing to the fuzziness of L2 LRs is the fact that the L2 lexicon is acquired when the L1 lexicon is already in place. There are two immediate consequences of such sequential learning. First, L2 phonological categorization difficulties lead to fuzzy phonological form encoding. Second, the acquisition of L2 word forms subsequently to their meanings, which had already been acquired together with the L1 word forms, leads to weak L2 form-meaning mappings. The FLR hypothesis accounts for a range of phenomena observed in L2 lexical processing, including lexical confusions, slow lexical access, retrieval of incorrect lexical entries, weak lexical competition, reliance on sublexical rather than lexical heuristics in word recognition, the precedence of word form over meaning, and the prominence of detailed, even if imprecisely encoded, information about LRs in episodic memory. The main claim of the FLR hypothesis – that the quality of lexical encoding is a product of a complex interplay between fuzziness and input frequency – can contribute to increasing the efficiency of the existing models of LRs and lexical access.
... In a study where L1 Spanish speakers learned novel words in L2 Dutch, Escudero, Simon, & Mulak (2014) found that orthographic forms with GPCs that were the same or similar across the two languages facilitated the learning of the association between an auditorily presented word and its pictured meaning, while those with GPC mismatches hindered learning. Ota, Hartsuiker, and Haywood (2010) found that L1 Japanese/L2 English speakers confused "near homophone" pairs of written English words containing vowels that do not contrast in their L1, but that are represented by different L2 graphemes (e.g., fan [faen], fun ...
Auditory speech appears to be linked to visual articulatory gestures and orthography through different mechanisms. Yet, both types of visual information have a strong influence on speech processing. The present study directly compared their contributions to speech processing using a novel word learning paradigm. Native speakers of French, who were familiar with English, learned minimal pairs of novel English words containing the English /θ/-/f/ phonemic contrast under one of three exposure conditions: (a) the auditory forms of novel words alone, (b) the auditory forms associated with articulatory gestures, or (c) the auditory forms associated with orthography. The benefits of the three methods were compared during training and at two posttraining time points where the visual cues were no longer available. We also assessed participants' auditory-only discrimination of the /θ/-/f/ contrast pretraining and posttraining. During training, the visual cues facilitated novel word learning beyond the benefit of the auditory input alone. However, these additional benefits did not persist when participants' discrimination and novel word learning performance were assessed immediately after training. Most interestingly, after a night's sleep, participants who were exposed to orthography during training showed significant improvement in both discrimination and novel word learning compared to the previous day. The findings are discussed in terms of online versus residual impacts of articulatory gestures and orthography on speech processing. While both visual cues are beneficial when they are simultaneously presented with speech, only orthography shows residual impacts leading to a sleep-dependent enhancement of lexical knowledge through memory consolidation and retuning of the second language /θ/-/f/ contrast. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
... Thus, their difficulties with the /r/-/l/ contrast percolated to the level of orthographic encoding and, ultimately, to orthographic-semantic mappings. Similar results were observed in a visual semantic categorization task with different English phonological contrasts and L1 Spanish and Japanese participants (Ota, Hartsuiker & Haywood, 2010). Additionally, in the homophone condition, pure confusions in orthographic-semantic mapping were observed: the participants accepted 'see' as corresponding to the definition "A body of water" (cf. ...
We introduce the blueprint of the Ontogenesis Model of the L2 Lexical Representation (OM) that focuses on the development of lexical representations. The OM has three dimensions: linguistic domains (phonological, orthographic, and semantic), mappings between domains, and networks of lexical representations. The model assumes that fuzziness is a pervasive property of the L2 lexicon: Most L2 lexical representations are low resolution and the ontogenetic curve of their development does not reach the optimum (i.e., the ultimate stage of their attainment with optimal encoding) in one or more dimensions. We review the findings on lexical processing and vocabulary training to show that the OM has a potential to provide an interpretation for the results that have been treated separately and to move us forward in building a comprehensive model of L2 lexical acquisition and processing.
... Thus, their difficulties with the /r/-/l/ contrast percolated to the level of orthographic encoding and, ultimately, to orthographic-semantic mappings. Similar results were observed in a visual semantic categorization task with different English phonological contrasts and L1 Spanish and Japanese participants (Ota, Hartsuiker & Haywood, 2010). Additionally, in the homophone condition, pure confusions in orthographic-semantic mapping were observed: the participants accepted 'see' as corresponding to the definition "A body of water" (cf. ...
We introduce the blueprint of the Ontogenesis Model of the L2 Lexical Representation (OM) that focuses on the development of lexical representations. The OM has three dimensions: linguistic domains (phonological, orthographic, and semantic), mappings between domains, and networks of lexical representations. The model assumes that fuzziness is a pervasive property of the L2 lexicon: most L2 lexical representations are low resolution and the ontogenetic curve of their development does not reach the optimum (i.e., the ultimate stage of their attainment with optimal encoding) in one or more dimensions. We review the findings on lexical processing and vocabulary training to show that the OM has a potential to provide an interpretation for the results that have been treated separately and to move us forward in building a comprehensive model of L2 lexical acquisition and processing.
... In recent years, studies that used cross-script language pairs were also conducted, such as Korean Hangual and English (Kim & Davis, 2003), Japanese Katakana and English . Though these languages have different writing systems, the underlying orthography-to-phonology mapping of Korean Hangual and Japanese Katakana did not differ much from that of English, which may influence these bilinguals' lexical processing (Chen & Ho, 1986;Ota et al., 2010). Specifically, Korean Hangual is in nature an alphabetic language, with each vowel and consonant corresponding to a fixed grapheme (e.g., ㅂ/b/+ㅏ/a/-ㅂ/ba/, as in ㅂ다/ba-da/, meaning "ocean"), and Japanese Katakana can be considered the Japanese letters phonologically representing loan words from alphabetic languages (e.g., タバコ/ta-ba-ko/, meaning "tabacco"). ...
The issue of bilingual phonological access remains unclear for bilinguals with cross-script language systems, which is especially true when the time course of phonological activation is involved. To investigate the time course of cross-script phonological activation, the present study asked Chinese-English bilinguals to complete a word naming task that was conducted in a forward-masked phonological priming paradigm in three stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) conditions. By comparing the interlingual and intralingual phonological priming effects in a within-subjects design, we found that (a) target naming in Chinese and English was facilitated by a phonologically similar English or Chinese prime in the three SOA conditions (43 ms, 75 ms, and 150 ms) and the facilitation effect of the prime reached the peak when the pronunciation of the prime-target pair most resembled each other and (b) manipulation of the SOAs affected both the naming latencies of target words and the sizes of the phonological priming effect. In particular, naming latencies in each prime-target type displayed an increasing tendency as the SOA prolonged. Moreover, despite the varied sizes of the priming effect in the three SOA conditions, we found a consistent pattern that the priming effects in two interlingual conditions resembled their respective intralingual conditions along the time course. Taken together, these findings provide strong support for an integrated phonological representation of bilinguals and further extend the language nonselective access hypothesis to language pairs with very different orthographic systems. Implications for the manipulation of the SOAs in the masked priming paradigm are also discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
... Consistent with this view, suggested that the degree of consistency of the mapping between graphemes and phonemes is an important factor influencing the orthography effect. Studies on second language acquisition seem to corroborate this speculation; L2 orthography may only help with L2 spoken word recognition when L1 and L2 phoneme-grapheme mappings are consistent (e.g., Escudero et al., 2014;Escudero & Wanrooij, 2010;Ota, Hartsuiker, & Haywood, 2010). ...
In conversational speech, it is very common for words' segments to be reduced or deleted. However, previous research has consistently shown that during spoken word recognition, listeners prefer words' canonical pronunciation over their reduced pronunciations (e.g., pretty pronounced [prɪti] vs. [prɪɾi]), even when the latter are far more frequent. This surprising effect violates most current accounts of spoken word recognition. The current study tests the possibility that words' orthography may be 1 factor driving the advantage for canonical pronunciations during spoken word recognition. Participants learned new words presented in their reduced pronunciation (e.g., [trɒti]), paired with 1 of 3 spelling possibilities: (a) no accompanying spelling, (b) a spelling consistent with the reduced pronunciation (a reduced spelling, e.g., "troddy"), or (c) a spelling consistent with the canonical pronunciation (a canonical spelling, e.g., "trotty"). When listeners were presented with the new words' canonical forms for the first time, they erroneously accepted them at a higher rate if the words had been learned with a canonical spelling. These results remained robust after a delay period of 48 hr, and after additional learning trials. Our findings suggest that orthography plays an important role in the recognition of spoken words and that it is a significant factor driving the canonical pronunciation advantage observed previously. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
... For example, learners of L2 English pronounce the <b> in lamb, while learners of L2 French pronounce femme [fam] as [faem] even when repeating orally presented words (Bassetti, 2017;Bassetti & Atkinson, 2015). The L1 grapheme-phoneme conversion system also has an impact on perception in word-picture matching (e.g., Hayes-Harb, Nicol, & Barker, 2010), visual semantic categorization (e.g., Ota, Hartsuiker, & Haywood, 2010), and phoneme classification (e.g., Escudero & Wanrooij, 2010), indicating that a visuo-orthographic form is present even when there is no written support. ...
... We suggest that L2 learners directly retrieve and process the visuo-orthographic word forms from LTM and diminish the impact of phonological forms to reduce the difficulty of the phoneme-grapheme correspondences. They must avoid the interference induced by their L1 system (Bassetti, 2017; Bassetti & Atkinson, 2015;Escudero & Wanrooij, 2010;Hayes-Harb et al., 2010;Ota et al., 2010). They therefore learn and directly retrieve the visuoorthographic forms corresponding to the learnt word. ...
L1 and L2 writers attend to different aspects of the formulation subprocess of writing. L2 writers devote more time and attention to low-level aspects such as grammar correction and spelling (Barbier 1998; Fagan and Hayden 1988; Whalen and Ménard 1995), leading to better spelling performances than L1 writers (Gunnarsson-Largy 2013). In deep-orthography languages such as French or English, L1 writers retrieve a phonological form of the word and then tend to automatically transcribe the most frequent corresponding orthographic form, whereas L2 writers seem to directly retrieve the exact orthographic form. For L2 writers, the visuo-orthographic form of the word therefore seems to prevail over the phonological one. Accordingly, we hypothesized that L1 and L2 writers rely differently on working memory (WM). To test this hypothesis, we designed an experiment where two groups (Levels B1 and C1) of instructed L2 French learners and an L1 French control group wrote dictated sentences, with compulsory negation marking in an ambiguous phonological context. While writing, they performed a concurrent task that induced a cognitive load on either phonological or visual WM, in order to identify the nature of the form maintained in WM during semantic checking. Results indicated that L2 French learners gradually move from a visual to a more phonological form of retrieval.
... It follows that semantic interferences will arise when, in viewing a visual word (e.g., son), the activated phonological representation (e.g., /s∧n/) in turn activates its homophone (e.g., sun). Using the same mechanism of phonological mediation, second language (L2) researchers attempted to examine native-language interferences resulting from the effects of native language (L1) phonology on L2 lexical representations in visual word recognition (Ota et al. 2009(Ota et al. , 2010. For example, Ota et al. (2009) found that Japanese speakers who have viewed an English word including /l/ or /r/ (e.g., lock) will activate the lexical representation of its minimal-pair counterpart (e.g., rock), causing cross-lexical interferences. ...
... But two important problems need to be resolved before Ota et al's (2009Ota et al's ( , 2010) findings prove to be generalizable. First, it still remains a controversial issue whether phonology is needed in accessing Chinese character meaning either in single-character tasks or in twocharacter word tasks (see Wang et al. 2003). ...
... The role of phonology is still more blurred in reading Chinese as a second language (L2). Second, Ota et al. (2009Ota et al. ( , 2010 conclude that first-language phonological interference is influenced by the first-language orthographic system and that it occurs when the orthographic systems of the late bilinguals' two languages are different in type. But it remains unclear whether differences in orthographic systems are a prerequisite for the occurrence of native-language phonological interferences or are only needed for late bilinguals and nullified for early bilinguals. ...
Previous research has indicated that, in viewing a visual word, the activated phonological representation in turn activates its homophone, causing semantic interference. Using this mechanism of phonological mediation, this study investigated native-language phonological interference in visual recognition of Chinese two-character compounds by early Hakka-Mandarin bilinguals. A visual semantic-relatedness decision task in Chinese was given to native Mandarin speakers and early Hakka-Mandarin bilinguals. Both participant groups made more false positive errors and responded more slowly to the pair of two-character compounds containing a homophone; but only Hakka-Mandarin bilinguals made more false positive errors and responded more slowly to the pair containing a near-homophone. We concluded that phonology is needed in both native and nonnative speakers' meaning access of Chinese two-character compounds and that native-language phonological interference is universal in L2 visual word recognition, not language type dependent; phonological and orthographic information are "interactive-compensatory" in helping Hakka readers' resolve the interference.
