No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Cross-Language Activation Begins During Speech Planning and Extends Into Second Language Speech
Abstract
Three groups of native English speakers named words aloud in Spanish, their second language (L2). Intermediate proficiency learners in a classroom setting (Experiment 1) and in a domestic immersion program (Experiment 2) were compared to a group of highly proficient English–Spanish speakers. All three groups named cognate words more quickly and accurately than matched noncognates, indicating that all speakers experienced cross‐language activation during speech planning. However, only the classroom learners exhibited effects of cross‐language activation in their articulation: Cognate words were named with shorter overall durations, but longer (more English‐like) voice onset times. Inhibition of the first language during L2 speech planning appears to impact the stages of speech production at which cross‐language activation patterns can be observed.
Open Practices
This article has been awarded an Open Materials badge. All materials are publicly accessible in the IRIS digital repository at http://www.iris‐database.org . Learn more about the Open Practices badges from the Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki
... While the studies above examine contexts where longer RTs have been reported in other studies, none of these phonetic studies have actually measured RTs within their experiments. Jacobs et al. (2016) is the lone exception, measuring all 3 of the dependent measures discussed here (n.b. without by-trial analysis of RT-phonetic relationships). Jacobs et al. (2016) examined Spanish word naming by three groups of Spanish-English bilinguals: intermediate-level Spanish learners, studying in classroom-based courses in an English-dominant environment; advanced learners in the same context; and intermediatelevel Spanish learners participating in a Spanish immersion program. ...
... Jacobs et al. (2016) is the lone exception, measuring all 3 of the dependent measures discussed here (n.b. without by-trial analysis of RT-phonetic relationships). Jacobs et al. (2016) examined Spanish word naming by three groups of Spanish-English bilinguals: intermediate-level Spanish learners, studying in classroom-based courses in an English-dominant environment; advanced learners in the same context; and intermediatelevel Spanish learners participating in a Spanish immersion program. Measures of RT, word duration, and VOT were gathered for cognates (translation equivalents sharing form and meaning; e.g., perfecto) and non-cognates beginning with voiceless stops (e.g., percance, Eng. ...
... They were produced with longer VOTs than non-cognates, consistent with the non-target language English. Jacobs et al. (2016) suggests that while cross-language activation may facilitate retrieval of similar phonological targets, it hampers accurate production, yielding articulations blending properties of the phonetic systems of the two languages (see Muscalu and Smiley, 2019, for related results in typing). ...
Speakers learning a second language show systematic differences from native speakers in the retrieval, planning, and articulation of speech. A key challenge in examining the interrelationship between these differences at various stages of production is the need for manual annotation of fine-grained properties of speech. We introduce a new method for automatically analysing voice onset time (VOT), a key phonetic feature indexing differences in sound systems cross-linguistically. In contrast to previous approaches, our method allows reliable measurement of prevoicing, a dimension of VOT variation used by many languages. Analysis of VOTs, word durations, and reaction times from German-speaking learners of Spanish (Baus et al., 2013) suggest that while there are links between the factors impacting planning and articulation, these two processes also exhibit some degree of independence. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of speech production and future research in bilingual language processing.
... Cognates are easier to learn than non-cognates in both childhood (Bosch & Ramon-Casas, 2014;Gampe et al., 2021) and adulthood (Elias & Degani, 2022;Ghazi-Saidi & Ansaldo, 2017;Lotto & de Groot, 1998;Raboyeau et al., 2010). Cognates also tend to facilitate language processing: even when operating in a single language, cognates often show processing benefits, evidenced by faster and/or more accurate picture naming (Acheson et al., 2012;Costa et al., 2000;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Ivanova & Costa, 2008;Jacobs et al., 2016;Li & Gollan, 2021;Roberts & Deslauriers, 1999;Rosselli et al., 2014;Stadie et al., 1995;Strijkers et al., 2010), fewer tip-of-the-tongue states (TOTs; Gollan & Acenas, 2004), and faster responses on word reading (de Groot et al., 2002;Lalor & Kirsner, 2001b), word association (Degani et al., 2018;van Hell & de Groot, 1998;van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002), translation (de Groot, 1992), and lexical decision tasks (de Groot et al., 2002;Dijkstra et al., 1999;Lalor & Kirsner, 2001a;Miwa et al., 2014). Moreover, sentences and longer texts containing cognate words are read more quickly and efficiently compared to texts with fewer or no cognates (Balling, 2013;Cop et al., 2017;Duyck et al., 2007;Van Assche et al., 2009, 2011. ...
... In these experiments, participants are briefly shown a prime in one language (typically presented so rapidly that participants are not conscious of its presence) followed by a target word in a different language. Advantage for words receiving treatment for aphasia in another language Kohnert, 2004 Lexical decision Faster responses to cognates and/or interlingual homonyms de Groot et al., 2002;Dijkstra et al., 1999;Haigh & Jared, 2007;Lalor & Kirsner, 2001a;Miwa et al., 2014 Positive translation or homonym priming Basnight-Brown & Altarriba, 2007;Chen et al., 2014;Cristoffanini et al., 1986;de Groot & Nas, 1991;Duñabeitia et al., 2009;Duyck & Warlop, 2009;Gerard & Scarborough, 1989;Gollan et al., 1997;Jiang, 1999;Kim & Davis, 2003;Lee et al., 2018;McPhedran & Lupker, 2021;Miwa et al., 2014;Nakayama et al., 2013Nakayama et al., , 2016Voga & Grainger, 2007;Wang, 2013 Picture naming Faster responses to cognates and/or interlingual homonyms Acheson et al., 2012;Costa et al., 2000;Gollan & Acenas, 2004;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Ivanova & Costa, 2008;Jacobs et al., 2016;Li & Gollan, 2021;Roberts & Deslauriers, 1999;Rosselli et al., 2014;Stadie et al., 1995;Strijkers et al., 2010 Cross-language repetition improves performance Branzi et al., 2014;Misra et al., 2012;Runnqvist & Costa, 2012 Knowing a phonological neighbor or morphological family member improves performance Hameau et al., 2021;Mulder et al., 2015 Knowing a translation equivalent improves performance Gollan et al., 2005;Gollan & Acenas, 2004;Higby et al., 2020 Superimposition of translation equivalent improves performance Dylman & Barry, 2018;Giezen & Emmorey, 2016;Hermans, 2004;Roelofs et al., 2016 Advantage for words receiving treatment for aphasia in another language Edmonds & Kiran, 2006;Kiran & Roberts, 2010 Semantic decision Faster responses to cognates Degani et al., 2018;van Hell & de Groot, 1998;van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002 Positive translation priming Chen et al., 2014;Grainger & Frenck-Mestre, 1998;Kim & Davis, 2003;McPhedran & Lupker, 2021;Wang & Forster, 2010 Knowing translation equivalent improved performance Poulin-Dubois et al., 2018 ...
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.
... The last question is answered by neurobiological studies examining the bilingual brain via brain scans. Researchers of bilingualism (Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2015) have found that there is never only monolingual mode for bilinguals, since cross-language activation begins during speech planning and extends into L2 speech (i.e., the name of the same word in the other language is activated even when the other language is suppressed in 'monolingual' mode). It has also been pointed out by brain scans detecting brain activities that even limited proficiency in the L2 changes the native language (Bice & Kroll, 2015). ...
... Researchers studying the bilingual mind (e.g., Bice & Kroll, 2015;Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2015) revealed that there is no pure monolingual mode for MLSs, as (unconscious) cross-language activation takes place during speech planning and that the different languages are constantly interacting with each other in the brain. Therefore, cross-language activation becomes more pronounced in interpreting as it is a conscious process required by the nature of the profession. ...
Preface
Dear Reader,
It is with great relief that we herald the publication of this collection of papers after seeing the University of Pécs Round Table (UPRT) conference and e-book series being brought to a halt by the pandemic and its aftermath. Poetically speaking, working on the volume was like watching a phoenix struggle to rise anew from its ashes—as we watched our long-standing biennial conference being left behind with the ashes; therefore, we were all the more determined to keep the UPRT tradition alive by bringing together new empirical studies in the field of English applied linguistics.
As evidence for the continued relevance and success of this endeavor, we firstly welcome contributions coming from a young generation of researchers in the field of English applied linguistics, TEFL/TESOL, and language teacher education (see Chapters 1, 4, & 6). Secondly, we are glad to acknowledge that the work of our new and our experienced authors continues to span across such a wide spectrum of English applied linguistics, both in focus and methodology. To say it specifically, we and our authors offer insights into identity-focused approaches as tools for exploring the complex developmental trajectories of foreign language learners (Chapters 1 & 4), teachers (Chapter 3), and other professionals (Chapter 2); online education as a site for language exchange programs (Chapter 5) and a factor to consider in language testing (Chapter 8), corpus building and analysis as gateways to effective instruction in English for specific purposes (Chapter 9), and university instruction as a site for improving intercultural competencies (Chapter 7) as well as pronunciation learning and teaching (Chapter 6).
With all this ahead, we wish you a fruitful reading experience and look forward to future contributions along the lines started now or picked up from our previous volumes.
Sincerely,
the Editors
... The last question is answered by neurobiological studies examining the bilingual brain via brain scans. Researchers of bilingualism (Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2015) have found that there is never only monolingual mode for bilinguals, since cross-language activation begins during speech planning and extends into L2 speech (i.e., the name of the same word in the other language is activated even when the other language is suppressed in 'monolingual' mode). It has also been pointed out by brain scans detecting brain activities that even limited proficiency in the L2 changes the native language (Bice & Kroll, 2015). ...
... Researchers studying the bilingual mind (e.g., Bice & Kroll, 2015;Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2015) revealed that there is no pure monolingual mode for MLSs, as (unconscious) cross-language activation takes place during speech planning and that the different languages are constantly interacting with each other in the brain. Therefore, cross-language activation becomes more pronounced in interpreting as it is a conscious process required by the nature of the profession. ...
This case study research examines an interpreter's linguistic and cultural identities, emotions, and attitudes toward varieties of English, and the linguacultures (Risager, 2005) and people associated with them. Successful language learning in the study is construed as a transformative and meaningful experience (Kramsch, 2009) shaping the participant's life choices as a result of emotional, psychological, and identity responses to second language acquisition (SLA). The participant's imagined second language (L2) habitus (Fekete, 20 19) is examined pointing out how she speaks, thinks, feels, and behaves differently using her L2. Using English as a lingua franca (ELF) (Jenkins, 2009) or as a foreign language (EFL) may render ownership of the language to English speakers while shedding light on their linguacultural attitudes towards varieties of English. A semi-structured interview was made with the participant to collect data for the research. The textual data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis in an iterative and inductive manner (Saldana, 2013) to find answers to the research questions. The results pointed out how English learning was, and German learning was not a transformative experience for the interpreter. Her identity construction was driven by a powerful desire to be a unique and respected individual resulting in a strong identification with British people and their culture as well as adopting an RP accent and choosing a prestige profession (interpreting) to belong to a small elite of English speakers. Therefore, she regarded other varieties of English as non-standard and ELF speakers as incompetent English speakers. She exhibited limited openness towards other cultures and the Englishes spoken in those speech communities. Her accent was found to be a prominent facet of her imagined English habitus acting upon her utterances, thoughts, and feelings when speaking in English. The data also pointed out the various roles and language modes she adopted in different contexts. 2
... repeatedly demonstrated that bilinguals 1 process, recognize and produce cognates faster than non-cognates in a variety of tasks, a phenomenon known as the cognate facilitation effect or the cognate advantage (e.g. Bice & Kroll, 2015;Caramazza & Brones, 1979;Costa, Caramazza, & Sebastian-Galles, 2000;Costa, Santesteban, & Caño, 2005;De Groot & Comijs, 1995;De Groot, Dannenburg, & van Hell, 1994;Dijkstra et al., 2010;Dijkstra, Grainger, & van Heuven, 1999;Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2015;Lemhöfer et al., 2008;Lemhöfer & Dijkstra, 2004;Mulder, Dijkstra, & Baayen, 2015; Van Hell & De Groot, 2008). For example, in picture naming tasks in L2, cognates are named faster than non-cognates, even when L1 is not explicitly mentioned (e.g. ...
... For example, in picture naming tasks in L2, cognates are named faster than non-cognates, even when L1 is not explicitly mentioned (e.g. Costa et al., 2000;Costa et al., 2005;Jacobs et al., 2015; Van Hell & De Groot, 2008). Cognates that are identical or nearly identical between L1 and L2 are also translated faster and more correctly than non-cognates, both from L1 to L2 and from L2 to L1 (e.g. ...
We explored the acquisition of three types of second language (L2) words in a paired–associates learning task. Seventy–six Polish participants were presented with 24 nonwords paired with pictures; they completed 8 interleaving test blocks of form production and meaning recognition, both followed by feedback. The nonwords included “cognates” (nonwords resembling the Polish word for the object depicted in a given picture), “false cognates” (resembling a different Polish word than depicted), and “non–cognates” (nonwords different from Polish words). We measured the learning trajectories for all word types across the blocks. Cognates were fastest to learn in the recognition blocks as well as in the production blocks. Compared to non–cognates, false cognates were learned equally fast in the recognition blocks, but faster in the production blocks. This suggests the learning of false cognates benefits from the overlap in L1–L2 form and is not harmed by L1 interference, while the learning of cognates benefits from both form overlap and conceptual overlap. The study is unique as it examines how learners acquire both the form of new words, and the link between the L2 forms and their meanings. It also explores the dynamics of the learning process.
... An important consideration is that the bilinguals tested in the current study were immersed in an L2 context outside of the testing situation. Research on the effects of L2 immersion on language processes has shown that access to the L1 lexicon is reduced after a period of immersion in the L2 (Linck, Kroll & Sunderman, 2009) and that the suppression of the dominant language in an immersion context reduces competition of the L1 during L2 production (Jacobs, Fricke & Kroll, 2016). Based on previous research, the consequences of this suppression would be reduced L1 interference (perhaps by restricting co-activation of the L1 during L2 use) with a negative impact on L1 access (Jacobs et al., 2016;Linck et al., 2009). ...
... Research on the effects of L2 immersion on language processes has shown that access to the L1 lexicon is reduced after a period of immersion in the L2 (Linck, Kroll & Sunderman, 2009) and that the suppression of the dominant language in an immersion context reduces competition of the L1 during L2 production (Jacobs, Fricke & Kroll, 2016). Based on previous research, the consequences of this suppression would be reduced L1 interference (perhaps by restricting co-activation of the L1 during L2 use) with a negative impact on L1 access (Jacobs et al., 2016;Linck et al., 2009). It would be useful to compare bilinguals on the same task before they came to the U.S. and again after several months of immersion to better understand how L1 immersion might impact the translation facilitation effect. ...
When bilinguals produce words in one language, their translation equivalents in the other language are thought to be activated as well. A common assumption is that this parallel co-activation produces interference, which slows down word retrieval. The current study aimed to evaluate the assumption of lexical interference during word retrieval by testing whether late Portuguese-English bilinguals were slower to name pictures in their native language when they knew the word in their second language compared to when they only knew the native language label. Instead of interfering with production, knowing the second-language label facilitated speed of word retrieval in the native language for both cognate and non-cognate translation-equivalent pairs. We suggest that using the second language may provide an indirect frequency boost for translation-equivalent words in the native language. This frequency boost has both long-term and short-term effects, strengthening connections to native-language labels when the translation equivalent is retrieved.
... A wide range of psycholinguistic studies investigating lexical processing have used cognate recognition and translation tasks (see De Grott, 2011). These studies have found that language learners name (e.g., Jacobs et al., 2016;Poarch & Van Hell, 2012) and translate cognates (e.g., Kroll et al., 2002) more quickly and accurately than non-cognate task items. In addition, researchers have employed cognate translation tasks for studies conducted within classroom settings for ecological validity that have also provided evidence of cognate advantages (Otwinowska & Szewczyk, 2017;Otwinowska et al., 2020;Rogers et al., 2015). ...
Knowledge of academic English vocabulary is essential for upper secondary L2 English learners preparing for university studies, yet previous research suggests students in Scandinavian settings may need support to acquire this lexis (Edgarsson, 2017; Henriksen & Danelund, 2015). The abundance of Graeco-Latin cognates between European languages and academic English has been shown to lessen the learning burden of academic English vocabulary for speakers of Romance languages (Cobb, 2000; Petrescu et al., 2017). However, less research has been conducted for speakers of Scandinavian languages who also have appropriate translations of Germanic origin for this vocabulary. Interestingly, previous studies have indicated that proficient Norwegian-speaking students taking tertiary studies made extensive use of Graeco-Latin cognates when translating academic English vocabulary, but research has yet to expand this investigation to upper secondary students and across proficiency levels. Therefore, the current study investigated if Norwegian-speaking students (N= 132) in their first year of upper secondary education produced Graeco-Latin cognates when translating academic English. Findings showed extensive use of L1 Latinate cognate forms to translate the English target words. However, less proficient learners had significantly fewer cognate translations and significantly more untranslated target words than more proficient learners. Findings suggest that in-class instruction raising awareness of Graeco-Latin cognates in academic English may be worthwhile, especially for less-proficient learners. Keywords: Academic vocabulary, cognates, translation, English language learners, vocabulary knowledge, proficiency, educations
... In contrast, long-term migrant bilinguals do not actively inhibit their L1 but keep it available to use when appropriate. Alternatively, it may be the case that long-term immersed bilinguals develop a very efficient inhibitory mechanism, which allows them to control cross-language competition in such a way that the consequences of L1 inhibition are not observable because of its efficient recovery (Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2015). Support for the hypothesis that immersion only affects L1 lexical access in L2 learners but not in long-term migrant bilinguals can be provided by the study by Yilmaz and Schmid (2012). ...
The study explores how native language (L1) lexical access is affected by immersion in a second-language (L2) environment, and by short-term reimmersion in the L1 environment. We compared the L1 picture-naming performance of Polish–English bilinguals living in the UK (migrants) against that of bilinguals living in Poland (controls). Each group was tested twice: the migrants while in the UK (L2 immersion) and after visiting Poland (L1 reimmersion); the controls twice in their L1 environment. Contrary to our expectations, there was no main effect of group, thus suggesting that L2 immersion per se does not impact L1 lexical access. Nevertheless, migrants benefitted from L1 reimmersion by showing faster naming latencies for high-frequency words after a short visit to their home country, probably due to more opportunities to encounter these words. Overall, the study shows that the cognitive system is sensitive to the language environment by quickly adapting the activation level of lexical items.
... Dynamic phonetic interactions as a source of CLI have received increasing attention in recent years, with L2 speech studies investigating the phonetics of code-switching (Antoniou et al., 2011;Bullock et al., 2006;Grosjean & Miller, 1994;Olson, 2016), the effects of language mode as induced by the experimental setting on speech production (Amengual, 2018(Amengual, , 2021Simonet, 2014;, and cognate effects in the acoustic realisation of languagespecific phonological categories (Amengual, 2012(Amengual, , 2016a(Amengual, , 2021Goldrick et al., 2014;Jacobs et al., 2016). More work is needed on both types of phonological interactions (static/permanent and dynamic/contextual) to understand how they both contribute to CLI, and importantly, we need to account for both static and dynamic phonological interactions in our theoretical frameworks of L2 and L3 speech. ...
A great majority of people around the world know more than one language. So, how does knowing one language affect the learning and use of additional languages? The question of cross-language influences is the focus of this book. Do bilinguals hear, understand, and produce language and meaning differently because of the languages they speak? How well can theoretical and computational models of language processing and acquisition explain and predict bilingual use patterns and acquisition trajectories? What learner, language, and context characteristics influence bilingual comprehension and production? This book provides a state-of-the-art review and critique of research into cross-language influences in phonology, lexicon, and morphosyntax, and suggests directions for future research. The interdisciplinary nature of the book bridges the gap between research on bilingualism and second language acquisition. The book will be of interest to graduate students, teachers, and researchers in linguistics and second language acquisition, cognitive psychology, and language education.
... Research has shown that bilingual individuals automatically activate both languages even when functioning in a single-language language context (e.g., Jacobs et al., 2016;Thierry & Wu, 2007). The target language is selected by inhibiting lexical representations of the non-target language (Green, 1998;Green & Abutalebi, 2013). ...
How speaking two languages affects executive functions has been a long‐standing debate and the mechanisms underlying the observed cognitive advantages of bilingualism remain unspecified. Here, using multivariate pattern classification methods, we decoded spatial patterns of neural signals associated with Flanker task performance in mono‐dialectal and bi‐dialectal speakers of Chinese. While univariate approach to even‐related potentials (ERPs) showed no between‐group difference, decoding accuracy of ERPs was reduced in bi‐dialectal as compared to mono‐dialectal speakers in both congruent‐neutral and incongruent‐neutral classifications. There was no effect of bidialectalism, however, on decoding accuracy of alpha‐band oscillations, an electrophysiological index implicated in inhibition. Behavioural data analyzed using the Drift Diffusion Model (DDM) showed facilitating effects of bidialectalism on non‐decision times but no effect on drift rates. These findings demonstrate that using two dialects on a daily basis enhances general attentional deployment rather than affecting specific component of executive functions such as inhibitory control. Given that the two dialects of Chinese differed almost exclusively in phonology, the bidialectalism effect was most likely motivated by resolving phonological competition at lexical processing level.
... In other words, English may have been uniquely disruptive for both Van Engen's and our participants because both experiments took place in the U.S., within the context of a predominantly English-speaking society. Importantly, the idea that the immersion context (or "predominant language"; Silva-Corvalán and Treffers-Daller 2016) of the experiment should figure into the interpretation of the results has been pointed out in other areas of bilingualism research (Beatty-Martínez et al. 2020;Jacobs et al. 2016;Linck et al. 2009;Zirnstein et al. 2018); our proposal is simply to extend this idea to account for the relative disruption caused by competing speech in different languages. ...
Auditory word recognition in the non-dominant language has been suggested to break
down under noisy conditions due, in part, to the difficulty of deriving a benefit from contextually constraining information. However, previous studies examining the effects of sentence constraints on word recognition in noise have conflated multiple psycholinguistic processes under the umbrella term of “predictability”. The present study improves on these by narrowing its focus specifically on prediction processes, and on whether the possibility of using semantic constraint to predict an upcoming target word improves word recognition in noise for different listener populations and noise conditions. We find that heritage, but not second language, Spanish listeners derive a word recognition-in-noise benefit from predictive processing, and that non-dominant language word recognition benefits more from predictive processing under conditions of energetic, rather than informational, masking. The latter suggests that managing interference from competing speech and generating predictions about an upcoming target word draw on the same cognitive resources. An analysis of individual differences shows that better inhibitory control ability is associated with reduced disruption from competing speech in the more dominant language in particular, revealing a critical role for executive function in simultaneously managing interference and generating expectations for upcoming words.
... Cognates are also named faster and with fewer errors in naming tasks (Jacobs et al., 2016;Schwartz & Kroll, 2006). ...
This chapter introduces the ACTFL World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages as an organizing framework for teaching and learning EIL. These span a total of 11 standards that correspond to the 5 Cs goal areas of Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons, and Communities. The chapter highlights the historical milestones of cooperation in education, explicates differences between collaborative and cooperative learning, and compares the characteristics of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic instruction. Additionally, the chapter describes the types of CL groups and clarifies disparities between these types and unstructured group work. The chapter concludes with a survey of the various formal CL approaches and structures that have been in vogue and proved effective. These include the Structural Approach, Student Team Learning, Learning Together, Complex Instruction, and Group Investigation.
... Although L1 activation in processing L2 cognate words results in facilitation of vocabulary learning and access to lexical meaning (Tessel et al. 2018), production studies display a disruptive effect in L2 phonetic accuracy (e.g., Flege and Munro 1994). The role of language experience is not yet clear from previous studies as some argue that the disruptive effect of cognates may decrease as L2 proficiency increases (Jacobs et al. 2016) while others have failed to find a clear relationship (Amengual 2012). The goal of this paper is to investigate the relationship between cognate status and proficiency in L2 production further by examining several phonological variables. ...
En esta comunicación vamos a presentar una propuesta de Unidad Didáctica desarrollada para el primer curso de ESO, en la que la traducción pedagógica se convierte en una herramienta más en el proceso de enseñanza-aprendizaje de la L2, inglés en nuestro caso.
Tras su uso intensivo en el método de Gramática-Traducción y la aparición de las nuevas metodologías, en las que la comunicación paso a ser el eje principal del aprendizaje, la traducción se convirtió en una actividad denostada. Sin embargo, en los últimos años, se aprecia un aumento considerable en la investigación académica sobre el uso de la L1 y de traducción pedagógica en el aula de la L2 en todo tipo de contextos, llegando a la conclusión de que estas son no solo adecuadas sino en muchos casos convenientes. De hecho, uno de los elementos clave en las aulas actuales, la taxonomía de Bloom, sitúa a la traducción en uno de los estadios más altos de complejidad.
Tras lo mencionado, pasaremos a explicar la UD, con sus objetivos, metodología y sesiones generales en las que la traducción pedagógica se convierte en una herramienta más que los alumnos pueden utilizar para la adquisición de los conocimientos y desarrollo de competencias recogidos en LOMCE LEY(también en LOM-LOE) y en el currículo andaluz, LEY. Como no pudo ser puesta en práctica en el aula, estudiaremos su adecuación por medio de un análisis DAFO
... At the same time, other research demonstrates that language immersion confers some special benefits for adult language learning (Freed, 1995;Freed, Segalowitz, & Dewey, 2004;. Immersion has been hypothesized to not only increase the level of exposure to the newly learned L2, but also to actively suppress the native or first language (L1, Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016;Linck, Kroll, & Sunderman, 2009). ...
When bilinguals switch languages they regulate the more dominant language to enable spoken production in the less dominant language. How do they engage cognitive control to accomplish regulation? We examined this issue by comparing the consequences of training on language switching in two different contexts. Chinese-English bilinguals were immersed in English (L2) while studying abroad (this study) or in Chinese (L1) in their native language environment (Zhang et al., 2015). In each study, participants performed the AX-CPT task while EEG was recorded and were then trained on language switching. While Zhang et al. found that training enhanced proactive control in the L1 context, there were no effects of training under L2 immersion conditions. Critically, L2 immersed bilinguals revealed enhanced proactive control at pre-test and greater L1 inhibition on language switching relative to L1 immersed bilinguals. We hypothesize that L2 immersion creates a natural training context that increases reliance on proactive control to enable regulation of the L1.
... Our corpus indicates that the use of institutional status was accompanied by other techniques only 27% of the time (k = 42/155), demonstrating much room for improvement in the use of multiple methods. An example of a study that applied multiple assessment techniques is Jacobs, Fricke, and Kroll (2016), which first categorized L2 learners into two groups based on their institutional status or role (students from intermediatelevel Spanish courses vs. Spanish instructors) and then demonstrated statistically significant group differences in their self-ratings and their scores on a lexical decision task. ...
Given that 10 years have passed since the publication of the most recent synthesis of proficiency assessment standards, the present review revisits proficiency assessment practices in research on second language acquisition (SLA), with the goal of examining whether the way in which scholars measure and report proficiency has changed. Our sample included 500 studies from five major SLA-related journals published between 2012 and 2019. The findings indicate that whereas over 90% of the studies assessed and reported second language proficiency in some way, only 42% of them did so with an independent measure. In line with previous surveys, the most popular assessment technique was institutional status, suggesting that relatively little change has taken place over time. Use or not of an independent measure of proficiency was also found to differ by certain study characteristics (e.g., learner population, research context), providing insight into areas of focus for future improvement.
... The less dominant L2 is not only less accessible for those who are not yet proficient (e.g. Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016), but it is also influenced by the L1, and that influence is evident even once speakers become relatively proficient (e.g. Dijkstra, Van Jaarsveld, & Brinke, 1998;Marian & Spivey, 2003). ...
A goal of early research on language processing was to characterize what is universal about language. Much of the past research focused on native speakers because the native language has been considered as providing privileged truths about acquisition, comprehension, and production. Populations or circumstances that deviated from these idealized norms were of interest but not regarded as essential to our understanding of language. In the past two decades, there has been a marked change in our understanding of how variation in language experience may inform the central and enduring questions about language. There is now evidence for significant plasticity in language learning beyond early childhood, and variation in language experience has been shown to influence both language learning and processing. In this paper, we feature what we take to be the most exciting recent new discoveries suggesting that variation in language experience provides a lens into the linguistic, cognitive, and neural mechanisms that enable language processing.
... van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002), phonology (e.g. Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016) and syntax (e.g. Hartsuiker, Pickering, & Veltkamp, 2002;Thierry & Sanoudaki, 2012), leading Köpke (2017a, 2017b) to propose that every bilingual is an attriter, in the sense that CLI, as observed in any bilingual, and attrition rely on the same processes, the differences being merely quantitative. ...
While it has long been assumed that brain plasticity declines significantly with growing maturity, recent studies in adult subjects show grey and white matter changes due to language learning that suggest high adaptability of brain structures even within short time-scales. It is not known yet whether other language development phenomena, such as attrition, may also be linked to structural changes in the brain. In behavioral and neurocognitive research on language attrition and crosslinguistic influence, findings suggest high plasticity as language interaction patterns of bilingual speakers change constantly and from early stages of language acquisition onwards. In this paper we will speculate on possible links between brain plasticity and L1 attrition in adult bilinguals, with particular attention to a number of factors that are put forward in memory frameworks in order to explain forgetting: time elapsed, frequency of L1 use, and interference from L2. In order to better understand the time-scales involved in the plastic changes during bilingual development, we then discuss some recent studies of re-exposure to L1 in formerly attrited immigrants, and their implications with respect to brain plasticity.
... However, bilinguals rarely commit this type of speech error (Poulisse, 2000); they have no apparent issue producing the intended language. At the same time, there is evidence that some types of cross-language competition may never be fully resolved, even in language production (Jacobs et al., 2016). One thought is that bilinguals recruit a form of cognitive control to help manage crosslanguage competition. ...
Bilinguals have distinct linguistic experiences relative to monolinguals, stemming from interactions with the environment and individuals therein. Theories of language control hypothesize that these experiences play a role in adapting the neurocognitive systems responsible for control. Here we posit a potential mechanism for these adaptations, namely that bilinguals face additional language-related uncertainties on top of other ambiguities that regularly occur in language, such as lexical and syntactic competition. When faced with uncertainty in the environment, people adapt internal representations to lessen these uncertainties, which can aid in executive control and decision-making.
We overview a cognitive framework on uncertainty, which we extend to language and bilingualism. We then review two “case studies” assessing language-related uncertainty for bilingual contexts using language entropy and network scientific approaches. Overall, we find that there is substantial individual variability in the extent to which people experience language related uncertainties in their environments, but also regularity across some contexts. This information, in turn, predicts cognitive adaptations associated with language fluency and engagement in proactive cognitive control strategies. These findings suggest that bilinguals adapt to the cumulative language-related uncertainties in the environment.
We conclude by suggesting avenues for future research and links with other research domains. Ultimately, a focus on uncertainty will help bridge traditionally separate scientific domains, such as language processing, bilingualism, and decision-making.
... Language coactivation has been shown to involve all linguistic levels: conceptual, lexical, or sublexical levels (Jacobs, Fricke & Kroll, 2016;Kroll et al., 2006). Although speech production models assume that activation at the conceptual level spreads to the lexical level (e.g., Caramazza, 1997;Dell, 1986;Levelt, 1989), there is still no agreement about how this activation propagates between lexical and sublexical representations (Muscalu & Smiley, 2018). ...
Bilinguals’ two languages seem to be coactivated in parallel during reading, speaking, and listening. However, this coactivation in writing has been scarcely studied. This study aimed to assess orthographic coactivation during spelling-to-dictation. We took advantage of the presence of polyvalent graphemes in Spanish (one phonological representation with two orthographic specifications, e.g., / b /for both the graphemes v and b) to manipulate orthographic congruency. Spanish–English bilinguals were presented with cross-linguistic congruent (mo v ement–mo v imiento) and incongruent words (go v ernment–go b ierno) for a dictation task. The time and accuracy to initiate writing and to type the rest-of-word (lexical and sublexical processing) were recorded in both the native language (L1) and the second language (L2). Results revealed no differences between conditions in monolinguals. Bilinguals showed a congruency and language interaction with better performance for congruent stimuli, which was evident from the beginning of typing in L2. Language coactivation and lexical–sublexical interaction during bilinguals’ writing are discussed.
... The results of these studies suggest that the activation of non-target phonological representations when bilinguals pronounce cognate items interferes with the acoustic realization of sounds in the target language, enhancing crosslinguistic influence in bilingual speech. And as shown specifically for voiceless stops, the VOTs of cognate words are subject to a stronger phonological influence from the non-target language than non-cognates (Amengual, 2012;Flege and Munro, 1994;Fricke et al., 2016;Goldrick et al., 2014;Jacobs et al., 2016). As Goldrick et al. (2014) explain, "the activation of non-target language representations for cognates will cascade to phonetic processes, enhancing the degree to which phonetic properties of the non-target language intrude during production" (p. ...
The present study examines the acoustic realization of the English, Japanese, and Spanish /k/ in the productions of two groups of English-Japanese bilinguals [first language (L1) English-second language (L2) Japanese and L1 Japanese-L2 English] and one trilingual group [L1 Spanish-L2 English-third language (L3) Japanese]. With the analysis of voice onset time (VOT) as a proxy for the degree of cross-linguistic influence in each language, this experiment compares the production patterns of L2 and L3 learners of Japanese and explores the effects of language mode and cognate status on the speech patterns in each of the languages of these bilingual and trilingual individuals. By manipulating the degree of activation of the target and non-target language(s) with the use of cognates and non-cognates in monolingual, bilingual, and trilingual experimental sessions, this study investigates static as well as transient phonetic influence. Even though these bilingual and trilingual speakers produce language-specific VOT patterns for each language, the acoustic analyses also reveal evidence of phonetic convergence as a result of language mode and cognate status. These results show that trilingual speakers are able to maintain language-specific phonological categories in their L1, L2, and L3, overcoming long-term (static) traces of one language influencing the other, despite evidence of short-term (dynamic) cross-linguistic influence.
... Additionally, Costa et al. (2006) proposed that less proficient bilinguals use an inhibitory mechanism which leads to asymmetrical switch costs, while proficient bilinguals use a noninhibitory mechanism leading to symmetrical switch costs and reverse dominance effects. The idea that the need for inhibition changes over time is also supported by the results of Jacobs et al. (2016), who found that the amount of cross-language activation may depend on a bilingual's proficiency. However, Finkbeiner et al. (2006a) have argued that asymmetrical switch costs are the result of using "bivalent stimuli" in experiments, and don't reflect language suppression. ...
Bilingual language control refers to a bilingual's ability to speak exclusively in one language without the unintended language intruding. It has been debated in the literature whether bilinguals need an inhibitory mechanism to control language output or whether a non-inhibitory mechanism can be used. This paper presents mathematical models instantiating the two accounts. The models explain how participants' reaction times in language production (naming) are impacted by across-trial semantic relatedness and consistency of language (same or different language across trials). The models' predictions were compared to data from an experiment in which participants named semantically-related and-unrelated pictures in their first and second language. Results indicate that within-language facilitation effects are abolished after a language switch, supporting the predictions of the Inhibitory Model. However, within-language facilitation was observed over the course of 'stay' trials in which no language switch was required, contrary to the predictions of both models. A second experiment was conducted to determine the origin of this unexpected facilitation, by separating spreading activation effects from incremental learning effects. The results suggest the facilitation observed in Experiment 1 was due to spreading activation. Together, the modeling and data suggest that language switching abolishes spreading activation effects, but cumulative semantic interference (created by incremental learning) is unaffected by language switching. This suggests that (1) within-language control is non-competitive, (2) between-language language control is competitive and (3) learning plays a role in bilingual language speech production.
... Furthermore, if cognate words can cause interference, then one way to reconcile the apparently contradictory results would be to assume that cognates might facilitate or inhibit production at different levels of processing. Indeed, previous studies suggest that interference and competition resolution between the two activated languages could arise at different levels involved in word retrieval (semantic, lexical, phonological, articulatory;Kroll, Bobb & Wodniecka, 2006;Dijkstra, Miwa, Brummelhuis & Baayen, 2010;Jacobs, Fricke & Kroll, 2015). It is thus possible that cognates also induce facilitation or inhibition at the phonological and/or lexical levels (see Li & Gollan, 2018a, 2018bMuscalu & Smiley, 2018 for tentative claims on the locus of facilitation/inhibition). ...
Most research showing that cognates are named faster than non-cognates has focused on isolated word production which might not realistically reflect cognitive demands in sentence production. Here, we explored whether cognates elicit interference by examining error rates during sentence production, and how this interference is resolved by language control mechanisms. Twenty highly proficient Spanish–English bilinguals described visual scenes with sentence structures ‘NP1-verb-NP2’ (NP = noun-phrase). Half the nouns and half the verbs were cognates and two manipulations created high control demands. Both situations that demanded higher inhibitory control pushed the cognate effect from facilitation towards interference. These findings suggest that cognates, similar to phonologically similar words within a language, can induce not only facilitation but robust interference.
... The interest in cognitive control is motivated by the increasing number of studies with bilinguals that have found a relationship between cognitive control and bilingualism, suggesting that cognitive control may be one of the underlying mechanisms that allows the mind and brain of bilinguals to accommodate the presence of two languages (Green, 1998;. These studies provide evidence that suggests that, even in monolingual contexts, bilinguals have their languages active at all times (e.g., Hatzidaki, Branigan, & Pickering, 2011;Hernandez, Li, & MacWhinney, 2005;Hoshino & Thierry, 2011;Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016;Oppenheim, Wu, & Thierry, 2018;Sunderman & Kroll, 2006). The constant co-activation of bilinguals' languages has been shown to generate cross-linguistic competition (e.g., Marian, Bartolotti, Rochanavibhata, Bradley, & Hernandez, 2017;Marian & Spivey, 2003). ...
In the past 20 years, the field of bilingualism has made a substantial effort to better understand the set of cognitive mechanisms that allow bilinguals to functionally manage and use their lan- guages. Among the mechanisms that have been identified, cognitive control has been posited to be key for proficient bilingual language processing and use. However, the role of cognitive control in developing bilingualism, i.e., among adult learners learning a second language (L2), is still unclear with some studies indicating a relationship between cognitive control and adult L2 development/developing bilingualism and other studies finding the opposite pattern. This set of contradictory findings merits further investigation in order to deepen our understanding of the role that cognitive control plays during the process of becoming bilingual. In the present study, we aimed to address this open question by examining the role of cognitive control among adult L2 learners of Spanish at the intermediate level using multiple behavioral measures as a way to provide a multidimensional perspective on the role of cognitive control and developing bilin- gualism. Our results indicate a significant relationship between cognitive control abilities, specific to reactive control, and overall L2 proficiency. We also found a significant relationship between speed of processing and overall L2 proficiency. The results of this study contribute to the existing body of knowledge on cognitive factors related to developing bilingualism and provide critical new insight into the underlying cognitive mechanisms that may contribute to adult L2 learners becoming bilingual.
... Indeed, accumulative evidence has shown that language contexts, such as language immersion, play important roles in bilingual language production (e.g. Baus et al., 2013;Jacobs et al., 2016;Linck et al., 2009;Stasenko & Gollan, 2019;Timmer et al., 2018). For example, Linck et al. (2009) found that English learners of Spanish immersed in the L2 (Spanish) environment produced fewer words in their L1 (English) in a verbal fluency task, as compared their counterparts immersed in L1. ...
The present study investigates the effect of mixed language training on the language control mechanism of bilingual language production. Two groups of unbalanced bilinguals were enrolled in pre- and post-tests using the picture naming task, but only the experimental group participated in an eight-day dual-language training session. Event-related potentials (ERPs) showed that, in the experimental group, the N2 mean magnitude was comparable between two languages in the pre-test, but it was larger in the native language (L1) than the second language (L2) in the post-test. In addition, the delta band power was similar between L1 and L2 in the pre-test, but L2 was associated with stronger power than L1 after training. In contrast, the control group showed no significant changes. These findings suggest that increased experience of language use in the dual-language context induces stronger proactive inhibitory control on L1, resulting in its lower activation.
... Cognates have been found to be usually more easily processed in many experimental paradigms, both in production and in comprehension tasks. For example, either identical (e.g., piano-piano) or nearly-identical cognates (e.g., important-importante) are translated faster and with higher accuracy than non-cognates in translation tasks [7][8][9], as well as named faster and with fewer errors in naming tasks [10,11]. Furthermore, cognates are faster recognized than matched non-cognates in lexical decision and word identification tasks, especially in the second language (hereafter, L2, see [12][13][14][15][16]). ...
The effects of cognate synonymy in L2 word learning are explored. Participants learned the names of well-known concrete concepts in a new fictional language following a picture-word association paradigm. Half of the concepts (set A) had two possible translations in the new language (i.e., both words were synonyms): one was a cognate in participants’ L1 and the other one was not. The other half of the concepts (set B) had only one possible translation in the new language, a non-cognate word. After learning the new words, participants’ memory was tested in a picture-word matching task and a translation recognition task. In line with previous findings, our results clearly indicate that cognates are much easier to learn, as we found that the cognate translation was remembered much better than both its non-cognate synonym and the non-cognate from set B. Our results also seem to suggest that non-cognates without cognate synonyms (set B) are better learned than non-cognates with cognate synonyms (set A). This suggests that, at early stages of L2 acquisition, learning a cognate would produce a poorer acquisition of its non-cognate synonym, as compared to a solely learned non-cognate. These results are discussed in the light of different theories and models of bilingual mental lexicon.
... Cognates have been found to be usually more easily processed in many experimental paradigms, both in production and in comprehension tasks. For example, either identical (e.g., piano-piano) or nearly-identical cognates (e.g., important-importante) are translated faster and with higher accuracy than non-cognates in translation tasks [7][8][9] as well as in naming tasks [10,11]. Furthermore, cognates are faster recognised than matched non-cognates in lexical decision and word identification tasks, especially in the second language (hereafter, L2, see [12][13][14][15][16]). ...
The effects of cognate synonymy in L2 word learning are explored. Participants learned the names of well-known concrete concepts in a new fictional language following a picture-word association paradigm. Half of the concepts (set A) had two possible translations in the new language (i.e., both words were synonyms): one was a cognate in participants’ L1 and the other one was not. The other half of the concepts (set B) had only one possible translation in the new language, a non-cognate word. After learning the new words, participants’ memory was tested in a picture-word matching task and a translation recognition task. In line with previous findings, our results clearly indicate that cognates are much easier to learn, as we found that the cognate translation was remembered much better than both its non-cognate synonym and the non-cognate from set B. Our results also seem to suggest that non-cognates without cognate synonyms (set B) are better learned than non-cognates with cognate synonyms (set A). This suggests that, at early stages of L2 acquisition, learning a cognate would produce a poorer acquisition of its non-cognate synonym, as compared to a solely learned non-cognate. These results are discussed under the light of different theories and models of bilingual mental lexicon.
... Barlow, Branson, & Nip, 2013;Flege & Eefting, 1987;Sebastián-Gallés, Echeverría, & Bosch, 2005), and on the level of online speech processing (e.g. Goldrick, Runnqvist, & Costa, 2014;Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016;Olson, 2013). Research has documented crosslanguage influences indicating that a bilingual's two languages are not isolated from each other even for early sequential and/or simultaneous bilinguals. ...
Purpose: The interconnectedness of phonological categories between the two languages of early bilinguals has previously been explored using single-probe speech production and perception data. Our goal was to tap into bilingual phonological representations in another way, namely via monitoring instances of phonetic drift due to changes in language exposure.
Design: We report a case study of two teenage English-Czech simultaneous bilinguals who live in Canada and spend summers in Czechia. Voice onset time (VOT) of word-initial voiced and voiceless stops was measured upon the bilinguals' arrival to and before their departure from a two-month stay in Czechia.
Data and Analysis: Each bilingual read the same set of 71 Czech and 58 English stop-initial target words (and additional fillers) at each time of measurement. The measured VOT values were submitted to linear mixed effects models, assessing the effects of target language, measurement time, and underlying voicing.
Findings/Conclusions: After the immersion in a Czech-speaking environment, for both speakers the count of voiced stops realized as prevoiced (i.e. having negative VOT) increased and the measured VOT of voiced stops (appearing different for English and Czech initially) drifted towards more negative (more Czech-like) values in both languages, while no change was detected for the voiceless stops of either English (aspirated) or Czech (unaspirated). The results suggest that the bilinguals maintain three-way VOT distinctions, differentiating voiceless aspirated (English), voiceless unaspirated (Czech), and voiced (English~Czech) stops, with connected bilingual representations of the voiced categories.
Originality: Data on phonetic drift in simultaneous bilinguals proficient in their two languages has not previously been published.
Significance/Implications: We show that observing phonetic shifts due to changes in the ambient linguistic environment can be revealing about the organization of phonological space in simultaneous bilinguals.
... Additionally, Costa et al. (2006) proposed that less proficient bilinguals use an inhibitory mechanism which leads to asymmetrical switch costs, while proficient bilinguals use a noninhibitory mechanism leading to symmetrical switch costs and reverse dominance effects. The idea that the need for inhibition changes over time is also supported by the results of Jacobs et al. (2016), who found that the amount of cross-language activation may depend on a bilingual's proficiency. However, Finkbeiner et al. (2006a) have argued that asymmetrical switch costs are the result of using "bivalent stimuli" in experiments, and don't reflect language suppression. ...
Bilingual language control refers to a bilingual's ability to speak exclusively in one language without the unintended language intruding. It has been debated in the literature whether bilinguals need an inhibitory mechanism to control language output or whether a non-inhibitory mechanism can be used. This paper presents mathematical models instantiating the two accounts. The models explain how participants' reaction times in language production (naming) are impacted by across-trial semantic relatedness and consistency of language (same or different language across trials). The models' predictions were compared to data from an experiment in which participants named semantically-related and-unrelated pictures in their first and second language. Results indicate that within-language facilitation effects are abolished after a language switch, supporting the predictions of the Inhibitory Model. However, within-language facilitation was observed over the course of 'stay' trials in which no language switch was required, contrary to the predictions of both models. A second experiment was conducted to determine the origin of this unexpected facilitation, by separating spreading activation effects from incremental learning effects. The results suggest the facilitation observed in Experiment 1 was due to spreading activation. Together, the modeling and data suggest that language switching abolishes spreading activation effects, but cumulative semantic interference (created by incremental learning) is unaffected by language switching. This suggests that (1) within-language control is non-competitive, (2) between-language language control is competitive and (3) learning plays a role in bilingual language speech production.
... In psycholinguistic experiments, orthographic cognates have been shown to be visually recognized faster than non-cognates and pseudo-words (e.g., Lemhöfer & Dijkstra, 2004;Mulder, Dijkstra, & Baayen, 2015)-a phenomenon known as the cognate facilitation effect. Identical or nearly identical cognates have also been found to be translated faster and more correctly than non-cognates (Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016). Psycholinguistic word-learning experiments have indicated that cognates are easier to remember and to retrieve than other types of words (Ellis & Beaton, 1993;Lotto & De Groot, 1998; see also Meade, Midgley, Dijkstra, & Holcomb, 2017, for the effect of orthographic neighborhood) and are also more resistant to forgetting (De Groot & Keijzer, 2000). ...
Some second language (L2) acquisition researchers have suggested that learners should be made aware of cross‐linguistic similarity for them to benefit from cognateness. To test this assumption, we ran two longitudinal classroom quasi‐experiments with Polish learners of English. We chose 30 Polish‐English cognates, 30 false cognates, and 30 non‐cognates matched on L2 frequency and concreteness and embedded them in exercises typical of English language teaching textbooks. Participants learned the words with their teachers in their classes at school. We manipulated the experimental group's awareness of orthographic cross‐linguistic similarity in awareness‐raising workshops. The results revealed that the participants had a higher chance of knowing cognates than other word types before the study. However, they acquired cognates embedded in exercises at the same rate as other word types. Also, the awareness‐raising manipulation, regardless of its intensity, had no additional effect on their acquisition of cognates and false cognates, indicating that awareness of cognateness did not boost learning cognates.
... Cross-language interactions have been observed when bilinguals process in the second language (e.g., Dijkstra, Van Jaarsveld, & Ten Brinke, 1998), but also when they process their first language (e.g., van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002); these interactions have been reported across different language modalities (Morford, Wilkinson, Villwock, Piñar, & Kroll, 2011) and also across languages with different writing scripts (Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Thierry & Wu, 2007). Although the majority of research revealing parallel activation between the bilinguals' two languages comes from work examining lexical access through the processing of cognates and homographs, there is a growing body of evidence supporting non-selective effects in other linguistic domains, such as phonology (e.g., Jacobs, Fricke, & Kroll, 2016) and syntax (e.g., Hartsuiker, Pickering, & Veltkamp, 2004;Hatzidaki, Branigan, & Pickering, 2011;Runnqvist, Gollan, Costa, & Ferreira, 2013;Sanoudaki & Thierry, 2014). ...
A central question in cognitive neuroscience concerns how individuals' cognitive abilities are shaped by learning from experience. This paper presents a critical overview of the discoveries that have emerged from the study of bilingualism, and the implications that they hold for language, cognition, and the brain. In particular, we review the range of cognitive control processes that appear to be influenced by bilingualism and the theoretical frameworks that have been proposed to account for the differences between bilinguals and monolinguals as well as among bilinguals themselves. We discuss current research directions on the consequences of bilingualism, and report emerging findings on the role of bilingual experience in the adaptation of the bilingual language system.
This chapter focuses on the study of language attrition in the context of L3 acquisition. Following a growing body of research on L2 effects on an L1, it is accepted that an L1 is not a static linguistic system and that L2 influence can present at the lexical, morphosyntactic, and phonological levels from even the earliest stages of L2 acquisition at the levels of both processing and representation. From this body of work, it is then logical to predict that any system can affect a previously acquired system, just as it has been established that existing systems can affect subsequently acquired systems. In this case, the prediction is that an L3 can influence an L1 and an L2, and a small body of research reported on in this chapter supports this prediction. The chapter begins with an overview of the relevant L1 attrition research and relates it to the predictions that this body of work makes for a context of L3 acquisition. I then highlight two of the questions that are central in the study of the effects of an L3 on previously acquired systems, reviewing the research that has established the groundwork for these lines of inquiry. The majority of this research has centered on linguistic factors among sequential L3 learners in a formal learning context. The chapter continues by pointing towards some outstanding questions stemming from this research and discussion of how we might model attrition in multilingualism. Towards the end, I raise some key considerations for the development of a methodological framework, highlighting the need to draw further from experimental approaches used in L1 attrition as a complement to L3-specific methods.
Bilingualism is a ubiquitous global phenomenon. Beyond being a language experience, bilingualism also entails a social experience, and it interacts with development and learning, with cognitive and neural consequences across the lifespan. The authors of this volume are world renowned experts across several subdisciplines including linguistics, developmental psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. They bring to light bilingualism’s cognitive, developmental, and neural consequences in children, young adults, and older adults. This book honors Ellen Bialystok, and highlights her profound impact on the field of bilingualism research as a lifelong experience. The chapters are organized into four sections: The first section explores the complexity of the bilingual experience beyond the common characterization of “speaking multiple languages.” The next section showcases Ellen Bialystok’s earlier impact on psychology and education; here the contributors answer the question “how does being bilingual shape children’s development?” The third section explores cognitive and neuroscientific theories describing how language experience modulates cognition, behavior, and brain structures and functions. The final section shifts the focus to the impact of bilingualism on healthy and abnormal aging and asks whether being bilingual can stave off the effects of dementia by conferring a “cognitive reserve.”
While language switching of bilinguals has been investigated extensively in the spoken domain, there has been little research on switching while writing. The factors that impact written language switching may differ from those that impact language switching while speaking. Thus, the study’s goal was to test to what extent phonological and/or orthographic overlap impacts written language switching. In four experiments, German-English bilinguals completed a cued language switching task where responses had to be typed. To-be-named translation-equivalent concepts were selected to be similar phonologically, orthographically or neither. Participants’ switching between languages while writing was facilitated by both phonological as well as orthographic overlap. Maximum orthographic overlap between translation-equivalent words with dissimilar pronunciations facilitated switching to the extent that no switch costs could be observed. These results imply that overlapping orthography can strongly facilitate written language switching and that orthography’s role should be considered more thoroughly in models of bilingual language production.
גיליון 19 של כתב העת השפיט לקסי־קיי, המכיל כרגיל שבעה ערכים שונים, מוצף סוגיות חברתיות־חינוכיות העולות מתוך תחומי דעת מגוונים.
אחת ההנחות הבלשניות העיקריות בתהליך של רכישה או למידה של שפה היא שרכיבים בשפה השנייה הדומים לשפת האם של הלומד יהיו פשוטים בעבורו, ואילו רכיבים שונים יהיו קשים. דמיון זה הוא גורם דומיננטי בתהליך הרכישה אך מלבדו מעורבים גורמים נוספים. במאמר זה אתמקד בדמיון ובשוני בתחום אחד מבין תחומי השפה השונים והוא תחום אוצר המילים, תחום בעל חשיבות מכרעת ברכישת שפה.
Abu-Rabiah, E. (2023). Cognates and false cognates as a tool to expand vocabulary in the acquisition of Hebrew as a second language for Arabic speakers. Lexi-Kaye, 19, 28–32. [In Hebrew*] https://doi.org/10.54301/APQU6073
Bilinguals employ both global and local control mechanisms to manage coactivated languages that compete for selection, yet little is known about how they operate on morphosyntactic information. The current study investigated bilingual language control mechanisms for a morphosyntactic production task. Across two experiments, 48 early Spanish-English bilinguals completed rapid instructed task learning paradigms with priming-in-item-recognition manipulations that investigated the extent to which parallel activation was observed across languages and across rules of the same type within a language. The results from the current experiments showed that it was more difficult to reject incorrect responses in the correct target language than to reject incorrect responses that contained the correct grammatical manipulation executed in the nondesired language. These results suggest that global control at the level of target language selection is more effective than local control processes during a bilingual morphosyntactic manipulation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Patterns of production of Spanish and English laterals by early sequential Spanish–English bilinguals (L1 and L2 respectively in the order of acquisition) were investigated. A total of 25 early Spanish–English bilinguals, who are all English-dominant (average age of L2 acquisition: 3;9), were recruited. They were recorded while reading sentences aloud in Spanish and in English containing laterals in onset and coda positions adjacent to front and back vowels. Target words with laterals were spectrographically analysed through an investigation of F1 and F2 values. The measurements obtained were compared between the two languages. The results show that the participants maintain separate acoustic realizations for the laterals in all four different phonetic environments in their two languages. Since their lateral productions are mixed with respect to the influence of the two languages, the results suggest that bilinguals’ interrelated systems influence each other at a fine-grained acoustic level.
A large literature has shown that language context –mixing and switching between languages – impacts lexical access processes during bilingual speech production. Recent work has suggested parallel contextual effects of language context on the phonetic realization of speech sounds, consistent with interactions between lexical access and phonetic processes. In this pre-registered study, we directly examine the link between lexical access and phonetic processes in Spanish–English bilinguals using picture naming. Using automated acoustic analysis, we simultaneously gather measures of reaction time (indexing lexical access) and acoustic properties of the initial consonant and vowel (indexing phonetic processes) for the same speakers on the same trials. Across measures, we find consistent, robust effects of mixing and language dominance. In contrast, while switching effects are robust in reaction time measures, they are not detected in phonetic measures. These inconsistent effects suggest there are constraints on the degree of interaction between lexical access and phonetic processes.
This chapter will explore the importance of lexical knowledge to second language learning and will highlight some of the challenges associated with vocabulary acquisition, especially in academic contexts. Importantly, the terms “learning” and “acquisition” will be used interchangeably throughout this book.
This chapter discusses the importance of language and culture comparisons in the context of learning English as an International Language (EIL). The chapter is premised on the principle that language comparisons support learners’ understanding of their own language and culture and deepen their knowledge of the nature of language and how it works in authentic and real-world communicative situations. The chapter highlights the role of cognates and contrastive rhetoric in foreign language acquisition and endorses a comparative approach for teaching culture so as to enable learners to reflect on cultural similarities and differences. The chapter concludes by presenting sample Cooperative Learning activities for comparing native languages and cultures to the target language (TL) and its culture.KeywordsCognatesContrastive rhetoricCulture comparisonsLanguage comparison
Speaking style variation plays a role in how listeners remember speech. Compared to conversational sentences, clearly spoken sentences were better recalled and identified as previously heard by native and non-native listeners. The present study investigated whether speaking style variation also plays a role in how talkers remember speech that they produce. Although distinctive forms of production (e.g., singing, speaking loudly) can enhance memory, the cognitive and articulatory efforts required to plan and produce listener-oriented hyper-articulated clear speech could detrimentally affect encoding and subsequent retrieval. Native and non-native English talkers' memories for sentences that they read aloud in clear and conversational speaking styles were assessed through a sentence recognition memory task (experiment 1; N = 90) and a recall task (experiment 2; N = 75). The results showed enhanced recognition memory and recall for sentences read aloud conversationally rather than clearly for both talker groups. In line with the “effortfulness” hypothesis, producing clear speech may increase the processing load diverting resources from memory encoding. Implications for the relationship between speech perception and production are discussed.
This chapter explores the use of structured group tasks in the testing of speaking skills in the context of a tertiary level first year speaking course. Participants included undergraduate university students from the department of English translation and interpreting at a state university located in Central Turkey. The structured task used in the study guided students into a group discussion during the speaking exam. The discussions in the exam sessions were video-recorded and transcribed. The transcriptions were analyzed from an interactional perspective. The students were also given an open-ended questionnaire to reveal their opinions about the ins and outs of the speaking test task tried out in the study. The questionnaire consisted of two parts. The first part required students to fill out their demographic information, and the second part inquired students' opinions about the group speaking task. The results of the analysis and questionnaire responses revealed additional opportunities provided by the use of structured tasks in speaking exams.
Speech production in multilinguals involves constant inhibition of the languages currently not in use. In relation to phonological development, higher inhibitory skills may lead to the improved suppression of interference from the remaining languages in one’s repertoire and more accurate production of target features. The participants were 20 sequential multilingual learners (13-year-olds with L1 Polish, L2 English, L3 German), acquiring their L2 and L3 by formal instruction in a primary school. Inhibition was measured in a modified flanker task (Eriksen & Eriksen 1974; Poarch & Bialystok 2015). Multilingual production of voice onset time (VOT) and rhotic consonants was tested in a delayed repetition task (e.g. Kopečková et al. 2016; Krzysik 2019) in their L2 and L3. The results revealed that higher inhibitory control was related to increased global accuracy in the L2 and L3 production. Moreover, higher inhibitory control was also linked to higher accuracy in the overall L2 production, but there was no significant relationship with the L3 accuracy. These findings suggest that inhibition may play a role in phonological speech production, however, it may depend on one’s level of proficiency.
This paper analyzes the acoustic properties of Spanish stressed mid vowels from a corpus of over 2,800 tokens produced by Galician-dominant bilinguals and Spanish monolinguals. Following principles of bilingual speech production theory, we explore whether these vowels present lexically conditioned open variants [ɛ] and [ɔ] not present in monolingual Spanish. In combination with linguistic factors, we also examine whether bilingual mid-vowel production in our corpus is related to social variables. Assuming a linguistic repertoires perspective that links variation to identity performance, we argue that Spanish /e/ and /o/ are sociolinguistic variables in Galicia and that the distribution of their variants can be exploited to perform social meaning.
Little research has been done on the effect of learning context on L2 listening development. Motivated by DeKeyser’s (2015) skill acquisition theory of second language acquisition, this study compares L2 listening development in study abroad (SA) and at home (AH) contexts from both language knowledge and processing perspectives. 149 Chinese postgraduates studying in either China or the UK participated in a battery of listening tasks at the beginning and at the end of an academic year. These tasks measure auditory vocabulary knowledge and listening processing efficiency (i.e., accuracy, speed, and stability of processing) in word recognition, grammatical processing, and semantic analysis. Results show that, provided equal starting levels, the SA learners made more progress than the AH learners in speed of processing across the language processing tasks, with less clear results for vocabulary acquisition. Studying abroad may be an effective intervention for L2 learning, especially in terms of processing speed.
Purpose
The interconnectedness of phonological categories between the two languages of early bilinguals has previously been explored using single-probe speech production and perception data. Our goal was to tap into bilingual phonological representations in another way, namely via monitoring instances of phonetic drift due to changes in language exposure.
Design
We report a case study of two teenage English–Czech simultaneous bilinguals who live in Canada and spend summers in Czechia (Czech Republic). Voice onset time (VOT) of word-initial voiced and voiceless stops was measured upon the bilinguals’ arrival to and before their departure from a two-month stay in Czechia.
Data and Analysis
Each bilingual read the same set of 71 Czech and 58 English stop-initial target words (and additional fillers) at each time of measurement. The measured VOT values were submitted to linear mixed effects models, assessing the effects of target language, measurement time, and underlying voicing.
Findings/Conclusions
After the immersion in a Czech-speaking environment, for both speakers the count of voiced stops realized as prevoiced (i.e., having negative VOT) increased and the measured VOT of voiced stops (appearing different for English and Czech initially) drifted towards more negative (more Czech-like) values in both languages, while no change was detected for the voiceless stops of either English (aspirated) or Czech (unaspirated). The results suggest that the bilinguals maintain three-way VOT distinctions, differentiating voiceless aspirated (English), voiceless unaspirated (Czech), and voiced (English–Czech) stops, with connected bilingual representations of the voiced categories.
Originality
Data on phonetic drift in simultaneous bilinguals proficient in their two languages have not previously been published.
Significance/Implications
We show that observing phonetic shifts due to changes in the ambient linguistic environment can be revealing about the organization of phonological space in simultaneous bilinguals.
The psycholinguistic literature suggests that the length of a to-be-spoken phrase impacts the scope of speech planning, as reflected by different patterns of speech onset latencies. However, it is unclear whether such findings extend to first and second language (L1, L2) speech planning. Here, the same bilingual adults produced multi-phrase numerical equations (i.e., with natural break points) and single-phrase numbers (without natural break points) in their L1 and L2. For single-phrase utterances, both L1 and L2 were affected by L2 exposure. For multi-phrase utterances, L1 scope of planning was similar to what has been previously reported for monolinguals; however, L2 scope of planning exhibited variable patterns as a function of individual differences in L2 exposure. Thus, the scope of planning among bilinguals varies as a function of the complexity of their utterances: specifically, by whether people are speaking in their L1 or L2, and bilingual language experience.
Despite the significant impact of prosody on L2 speakers' intelligibility, few studies have examined the production of prosodic cues associated with word segmentation in non-native or non-dominant languages. Here, 62 French-English bilingual adults, who varied in L1 (French or English) and language dominance, produced sentences built around syllable strings that can be produced either as one bisyllabic word or two monosyllabic words. Each participant produced both English and French utterances, providing both native productions (used as reference) and L2 productions. Acoustic analyses of the mean fundamental frequency (F0) and duration of both syllables of the ambiguous string revealed that speakers' relative language dominance affected the speakers' prosodic cue production over and above L1. Speakers also produced different prosodic patterns in English and French, suggesting that the production of prosodic cues associated with word-segmentation is both adaptive (modified by language experience) and selective (specific to each language).
The present study addresses the question of how practice in expressing the content to be conveyed in a specific situation influences speech production planning processes. A comparison of slips of the tongue in Japanese collected from spontaneous everyday conversation and those collected from largely preplanned conversation in live-broadcast TV programs reveals that, although there are those aspects of speech production planning that are unaffected by practice, there are various practice effects, most of which can be explained in terms of automatization of the processing of content, resulting in shifts in the loci of errors.
In this article we discuss the role of desirable difficulties in vocabulary learning from two perspectives, one having to do with identifying conditions of learning that impose initial challenges to the learner but then benefit later retention and transfer, and the other having to do with the role of certain difficulties that are intrinsic to language processes, are engaged during word learning, and reflect how language is understood and produced. from each perspective we discuss evidence that supports the notion that difficulties in learning and imposed costs to language processing may produce benefits because they are likely to increase conceptual understanding. We then consider the consequences of these processes for actual second- language learning and suggest that some of the domain- general cognitive advantages that have been reported for proficient bilinguals may reflect difficulties imposed by the learning process, and by the requirement to negotiate cross- language competition, that are broadly desirable. as alice Healy and her collaborators were perhaps the first to demonstrate, research on desirable difficulties in vocabulary and language learning holds the promise of bringing together research traditions on memory and language that have much to offer each other.
Current approaches to second language acquisition (SLA) can be divided broadly into two groups: nativist models and empiricist models. Nativist models attribute language development to the operation of a universal, genetically controlled, language instinct. For researchers in the nativist tra-dition, the learning of the core features of a second language involves little more than the setting of a few switches for the parameters. Many nativists view second language acquisition as recapitulating the course of first language acquisition (Bickerton, 1984; Krashen, 1982) because a strong version of the nativist position holds that both first and second language learning are determined by the underlying principles of Universal Grammar. Empiricist approaches to second language acquisition tend to emphasize the extent to which the second language must be actually learned. Some second language researchers who are willing to grant that first language acquisition is strongly influenced by Universal Grammar are not willing to view second language acquisition in the same light (Bley-Vroman, Felix, & loup, 1988; Clahsen & Muysken, 1986; Schachter, 1989). Researchers who accept nativist approaches to first language acquisition and empiricist ap-proaches to second language acquisition often bolster their analysis by point-ing to evidence for a critical period for language learning. Johnson and Newport (1989, 1991), for example, have argued that the onset of puberty 113 114 MACWHINNEY marks the end of the critical period for language learning, after which the learner can no longer rely on the forces of Universal Grammar to facilitate the task of second language learning, (See Harley & Wang, chapter 1, this volume, for an up-to-date review of the critical-period literature.) In this chapter, we explore a position that views both first and second language learning as constructive, data-driven processes that rely not on universals of linguistic structure, but on universals of cognitive strucaire. This model is the Competition Model of MacWhinney and Bates (MacWhin-ney, 1987a, 1989, 1992). The Competition Model presents a functionalist and connectionist view of both first and second language learning that attributes development to learning and transfer, rather than to the principles and parameters of Universal Grammar. We explore how the Competition Model deals with some of the basic facts of both first and second language learning, and we focus on those aspects of the model that allow it to distinguish between the two types of language learning. Before looking at specific studies and specific findings, let us first review the basic theoretical commitments of the Competition Model. These principles are claimed to hold for both first and second language learning.
It is well known that multilingual speakers' nonnative productions are accented. Do these deviations from monolingual productions simply reflect the mislearning of nonnative sound categories, or can difficulties in processing speech sounds also contribute to a speaker's accent? Such difficulties are predicted by interactive theories of production, which propose that nontarget representations, partially activated during lexical access, influence phonetic processing. We examined this possibility using language switching, a task that is well known to disrupt multilingual speech production. We found that these disruptions extend to the articulation of individual speech sounds. When native Spanish speakers are required to unexpectedly switch the language of production between Spanish and English, their speech becomes more accented than when they do not switch languages (particularly for cognate targets). These findings suggest that accents reflect not only difficulty in acquiring second-language speech sounds but also the influence of representations partially activated during on-line speech processing.
Previous findings on adult second-language (L2) learners showed systematic phonetic changes in their production of the native language (L1) starting in the first weeks of L2 learning [Chang, C. B. (2012). Rapid and multifaceted effects of second-language learning on first-language speech production. Journal of Phonetics, 40, 249–268]. This “phonetic drift” of L1 production in novice L2 learners was consistent with reports of phonetic drift in advanced L2 learners; however, the fact that novice learners showed relatively pronounced drift was unexpected. To explore the hypothesis that this pattern is due to a novelty effect boosting the encoding and retrieval of elementary L2 experience, the current study compared the inexperienced learners analyzed previously (learners with no prior knowledge of the L2) to experienced learners enrolled in the same language program. In accordance with the hypothesis, experienced learners manifested less phonetic drift in their production of L1 stops and vowels than inexperienced learners, suggesting that progressive familiarization with an L2 leads to reduced phonetic drift at later stages of L2 experience. These findings contradict the assumption that L2 influence on the L1 is weakest at early stages of L2 learning and argue in favor of viewing the L1 and L2 both as dynamic systems undergoing continuous change.
A goal of second language (L2) learning is to enable learners to understand and speak L2 words without mediation through the first language (L1). However, psycholinguistic research suggests that lexical candidates are routinely activated in L1 when words in L2 are processed. In this article we describe two experiments that examined the acquisition of L2 lexical fluency. In Experiment 1, two groups of native English speakers, one more and one less fluent in French as their L2, performed word naming and translation tasks. Learners were slower and more error prone to name and to translate words into L2 than more fluent bilinguals. However, there was also an asymmetry in translation performance such that forward translation was slower than backward translation. Learners were also slower than fluent bilinguals to name words in English, the L1 of both groups. In Experiment 2, we compared the performance of native English speakers at early stages of learning French or Spanish to the performance of fluent bilinguals on the same tasks. The goal was to determine whether the apparent cost to L1 reading was a consequence of L2 learning or a reflection of differences in cognitive abilities between learners and bilinguals. Experiment 2 replicated the main features of Experiment 1 and showed that bilinguals scored higher than learners on a measure of L1 reading span, but that this difference did not account for the apparent cost to L1 naming.We consider the implications of these results for models of the developing lexicon.
Despite abundant evidence of malleability in speech production, previous studies of the effects of late second-language learning on first-language speech production have been limited to advanced learners. This study examined these effects in novice learners, adult native English speakers enrolled in elementary Korean classes. In two acoustic studies, learners' production of English was found to be influenced by even brief experience with Korean. The effect was consistently one of assimilation to phonetic properties of Korean; moreover, it occurred at segmental, subsegmental, and global levels, often simultaneously. Taken together, the results suggest that cross-language linkages are established from the onset of second-language learning at multiple levels of phonological structure, allowing for pervasive influence of second-language experience on first-language representations. The findings are discussed with respect to current notions of cross-linguistic similarity, language development, and historical sound change.
We investigated the online relationship between overt articulation and the central processes of speech production. In two experiments manipulating the timing of Stroop interference in color naming, we found that naming behavior can shift between exhibiting a staged or cas- caded mode of processing, depending on task demands: an effect of Stroop interference on naming durations arose only when there was increased pressure for speeded responding. In a simple connectionist model of information processing applied to color naming, we accounted for the current results by manipulating a single parameter, termed gain, modulating the rate of information accrual within the network. We discuss our results in relation to mechanisms of strategic control and the link between cognition and action. The spatial and temporal relationship between cogni- tion and action, at the experimental time scale of mil- liseconds or seconds, is central to many areas of research in experimental psychology. Reaction times are collected as a measure of processing load in perhaps every do- main of experimental psychology, but in many cases, lit- tle thought is given to the relationship between internal levels of processing and the resulting execution of behav- ior. In particular, many researchers do not make explicit claims about how much and what aspects of processing are reflected in their chronometric measures of behavior; it is assumed that the cognitive process in question plays a sufficient role in carrying out the measured behavior. The current study focuses on the relationship between the time course of cognitive processing and the time course of motor execution. For a given unit of action (e.g., a spoken word or a written letter), one can ask the question, how much cognitive processing must persist during motor execution to support the action itself? We shall define the relationship between cognition and ac- tion as staged if, upon initiation of a given unit of action
The current study investigated the scope of bilingual language control differentiating between whole-language control involving control of an entire lexicon specific to 1 language and lexical-level control involving only a restricted set of recently activated lexical representations. To this end, we tested 60 Dutch-English (Experiment 1) and 64 Chinese-English bilinguals (Experiment 2) on a verbal fluency task in which speakers produced members of letter (or phoneme for Chinese) categories first in 1 language and then members of either (a) the same categories or (b) different categories in their other language. Chinese-English bilinguals also named pictures in both languages. Both bilingual groups showed reduced dominant language fluency after producing exemplars from the same categories in the nondominant language, whereas nondominant language production was not influenced by prior production of words from the same categories in the other language. Chinese-English, but not Dutch-English, bilinguals exhibited similar testing order effects for different letter/phoneme categories. In addition, Chinese-English bilinguals who exhibited significant testing order effects in the repeated categories condition of the fluency task exhibited no such effects when naming repeated pictures after a language switch. These results imply multiple levels of inhibitory control in bilingual language production. Testing order effects in the verbal fluency task pinpoint a lexical locus of bilingual control, and the finding of interference effects for some bilinguals even when different categories are tested across languages further implies a whole-language control process, although the ability to exert such global inhibition may only develop for some types of bilinguals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Studies in SLA have debated the importance of context of learning in
the process of developing linguistic skills in a second language (L2).
The present paper examines whether study abroad, as it provides
opportunities for authentic L2 context, facilitates the acquisition of
Spanish phonology. The corpus of this investigation is composed of
speech samples from 46 students of Spanish: 26 studying abroad in Spain
and 20 in a regular classroom environment in the United States. The
students read a paragraph with 60 target words including segments such
as word-initial stops (i.e., [p t k]), 1 intervocalic
fricatives (i.e., [
]), word-final laterals
(i.e., [l]), and palatal nasals (i.e.,
).
The findings reveal the following patterns for both regular classroom and
study abroad students across time: (a) similar gain in the case of
voiced initial stops and word-final laterals, (b) lack of gain in the
case of intervocalic fricatives, and (c) high levels of accuracy in the
case of the palatal nasal in the pretest. Concerning the external data,
the following factor groups predicted phonological gain among all
learners: years of formal language instruction, reported use of Spanish
before the semester, reported use of Spanish outside the classroom
during the semester (days), reported use of Spanish outside the
classroom during the semester (hours), gender, entrance Oral
Proficiency Interview, exit Oral Proficiency Interview, and level at
which formal instruction began.
This study places the predictions of the bilingual interactive
activation model (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 1998) and the revised hierarchical model (Kroll &
Stewart, 1994) in the same context to
investigate lexical processing in a second language (L2). The performances
of two groups of native English speakers, one less proficient and the
other more proficient in Spanish, were compared on translation
recognition. In this task, participants decided whether two words, one in
each language, are translation equivalents. The items in the critical
conditions were not translation equivalents and therefore required a
“no” response, but were similar to the correct translation in
either form or meaning. For example, for translation equivalents such as
cara-face, critical distracters included (a) a form-related
neighbor to the first word of the pair (e.g., cara-card), (b) a
form-related neighbor to the second word of the pair, the translation
equivalent (cara-fact), or (c) a meaning-related word
(cara-head). The results showed that all learners, regardless of
proficiency, experienced interference for lexical neighbors and for
meaning-related pairs. However, only the less proficient learners also
showed effects of form relatedness via the translation equivalent.
Moreover, all participants were sensitive to cues to grammatical class,
such that lexical interference was reduced or eliminated when the two
words of each pair were drawn from different grammatical classes. We
consider the implications of these results for L2 lexical processing and
for models of the bilingual lexicon. a
Bilingual speech requires that the language of utterances be selected prior to articulation. Past research has debated whether the language of speaking can be determined in advance of speech planning and, if not, the level at which it is eventually selected. We argue that the reason that it has been difficult to come to an agreement about language selection is that there is not a single locus of selection. Rather, language selection depends on a set of factors that vary according to the experience of the bilinguals, the demands of the production task, and the degree of activity of the nontarget language. We demonstrate that it is possible to identify some conditions that restrict speech planning to one language alone and others that open the process to cross-language influences. We conclude that the presence of language nonselectivity at all levels of planning spoken utterances renders the system itself fundamentally nonselective.
We looked at foreign-language (FL) vocabulary learning and forgetting in experienced FL learners, using a paired-associate training technique in which native-language words were paired with pseudowords. The training involved 6 presentations of the same 60 translation pairs, followed by a test after the 2nd, 4th, and 6th presentation round. A retest followed 1 week after training. The stimulus materials were manipulated on word concreteness, cognate status, and word frequency, and both productive and receptive testing took place. Cognates and concrete words were easier to learn and less susceptible to forgetting than noncognates and abstract words. Word frequency hardly affected performance. Overall, receptive testing showed better recall than productive testing. Theoretical accounts of these findings are proposed.
The underlying premise of this study was that the two phonetic subsystems of a bilingual interact. The study tested the hypothesis that the vowels a bilingual produces in a second language (L2) may differ from vowels produced by monolingual native speakers of the L2 as the result of either of two mechanisms: phonetic category assimilation or phonetic category dissimilation. Earlier work revealed that native speakers of Italian identify English/eI/ tokens as instances of the Italian /e/ category even though English /eI/ is produced with more tongue movement than Italian /e/ is. Acoustic analyses in the present study examined /eI/s produced by four groups of Italian-English bilinguals who differed according to their age of arrival in Canada from Italy (early versus late) and frequency of continued Italian use (low-L1- use versus high-L1-use). Early bilinguals who seldom used Italian (Early-low) were found to produce English /eI/ with significantly more movement than native English speakers. However, both groups of late bilinguals (Late-low, Late-high) tended to produced /eI/ with less movement than NE speakers. The exaggerated movement in /eI/s produced by the Early-low group participants was attributed to the dissimilation of a phonetic category they formed for English /eI/ from Italian /e/. The undershoot of movement in /eI/s produced by late bilinguals, on the other hand, was attributed to their failure to establish a new category for English /eI/, which led to the merger of the phonetic properties of English /eI/ and Italian /e/.
English-Spanish bilinguals named visually presented words aloud in each language. The words included cognates (e.g., fruit-fruta) and non-cognate translations (e.g., pencil-ládpiz). The cognates were selected so that the orthographic and phonological similarity of their lexical form in each language varied orthogonally. Cognate naming latencies were influenced by the cross-language match of the orthographic and phonological codes. When the orthographic forms were similar in the two languages, naming latencies were slowed by dissimilar phonology, providing evidence for feed-forward activation from orthography to phonology across languages. When the orthographic forms were dissimilar, the effects of the corresponding phonological match were not statistically reliable. The results suggest that lexical access is non-selective across bilinguals' two languages, and that the degree of consistency between orthographic and phonological codes influences the manner in which cross-language competition is manifest. Findings are discussed in terms of feed-forward and feed-backward activation dynamics across languages.
This study examined imitation of a voice onset time (VOT) continuum ranging from/da/to/ta/by by subjects differing in age and/or linguistic experience. The subjects did not reproduce the incremental increases in VOT linearly, but instead showed abrupt shifts in VOT between two or three VOT response "modes." The location of the response shifts occurred at the same location as phoneme boundaries obtained in a previous identification experiment. This supports the view that the stimuli were categorized before being imitated. Children and adults who spoke just Spanish generally produced only lead and short-lag VOT responses. English monolinguals tended to produce stops with only short-lag and long-lag VOT values. The native Spanish adults and children who spoke English, on the other hand, produced stops with VOT values falling into all three model VOT ranges. This was interpreted to mean that they had established a phonetic category [th] with which to implement the voiceless aspirated realizations of /t/ in English. Their inability to produce English /p,t,k/ with the same values as native speakers of English must therefore be attributed to the information specified in their new English phonetic categories (which might be incorrect as the result of exposure to Spanish-accented English), to partially formed phonetic realization rules, or both.
This article presents a theory of sentence production that accounts for facts about speech errors—the kinds of errors that occur, the constraints on their form, and the conditions that precipitate them. The theory combines a spreading-activation retrieval mechanism with assumptions regarding linguistic units and rules. Two simulation models are presented to illustrate how the theory applies to phonological encoding processes. One was designed to produce the basic kinds of phonological errors and their relative frequencies of occurrence. The second was used to fit data from an experimental technique designed to create these errors under controlled conditions.
The authors investigated the on-line relationship between overt articulation and the central processes of speech production. In 2 experiments manipulating the timing of Stroop interference in color naming, the authors found that naming behavior can shift between exhibiting a staged or cascaded mode of processing, depending on task demands: An effect of Stroop interference on naming durations arose only when there was increased pressure for speeded responding. In a simple connectionist model of information processing applied to color naming, the authors accounted for the current results by manipulating a single parameter, termed "gain," modulating the rate of information accrual within the network. Results are discussed in relation to mechanisms of strategic control and the link between cognition and action.
Three different speech production paradigms assessed C. T. Kello, D. C. Plaut, and B. MacWhinney's (2000) claim that the characteristics of speech production flexibly vary between staged and cascaded modes depending on task demand. All experiments measured response latencies and durations of single words without and with a response deadline. Experiment 1 used a picture-word interference task; Experiment 2 blocked pictures either by semantic category or by word-initial overlap; and Experiment 3 used a Stroop paradigm. In all cases, systematic effects of semantic and form relatedness were obtained on latencies but not on response durations. These results support the assumption that articulation, as assessed by response duration, is never influenced by central cognitive processes once a response has been initiated.
In three experiments, we studied the influence of foreign language knowledge on native language performance in an exclusively native language context. Trilinguals with Dutch as their native and dominant language (L1), English as their second language (L2), and French as their third language (L3) performed a word association task (Experiment 1) or a lexical decision task (Experiments 2 and 3) in L1. The L1 stimulus words were cognates with their translations in English, cognates with their translations in French, or were noncognates. In Experiments 1 and 2 with trilinguals who were highly proficient in English and relatively low in proficiency in French, we observed shorter word association and lexical decision times to the L1 words that were cognates with English than to the noncognates. In these relatively low-proficiency French speakers, response times (RTs) for the L1 words that were cognates with French did not differ from those for the noncognates. In Experiment 3, we tested Dutch-English-French trilinguals with a higher level of fluency in French (i.e., equally fluent in English and in French). We now observed faster responses on the L1 words that were cognates with French than on the noncognates. Lexical decision times to the cognates with English were also shorter than those to then oncognates. The results indicate that words presented in the dominant language, to naive participants, activate information in the nontarget, and weaker, language in parallel, implying that the multilinguals' processing system is profoundly nonselective with respect to language. A minimal level of nontarget language fluency seems to be required, however, before any weaker language effects become noticeable in L1 processing.
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
This paper investigates the effects of explicit instruction and self-analysis on the acquisition of second-language (L2) pronunciation, specifically of nine Spanish phonemes learned by native speakers of English. Oral data were collected from seventeen students enrolled in an undergraduate course in Spanish Phonetics at the beginning and end of the semester. The treatment consisted of standard phonetics instruction, practice with voice analysis software and oral self-analysis projects. Target sounds were rated for accuracy of pronunciation through voice analysis software. Results are promising, indicating that the participants receiving explicit phonetics instruction improved their pronunciation on specific features.
Although Clark's (1973) critique of statistical procedures in language and memory studies (the "language-as-fixed-effect fallacy") has had a profound effect on the way such analyses have been carried out in the past 20 years, it seems that the exact nature of the problem and the proposed solution have not been understood very well. Many investigators seem to assume that generalization to both the subject population and the language as a whole is automatically ensured if separate subject (F1) and item (F2) analyses are performed and that the null hypothesis may safely be rejected if these F values are both significant. Such a procedure is, however, unfounded and not in accordance with the recommendations of Clark (1973). More importantly and contrary to current practice, in many cases there is no need to perform separate subject and item analyses since the traditional F1 is the correct test statistic. In particular this is the case when item variability is experimentally controlled by matching or by counterbalancing.
The present study investigates voice onset times (VOTs) to determine if cognates enhance the cross-language phonetic influences in the speech production of a range of Spanish–English bilinguals: Spanish heritage speakers, English heritage speakers, advanced L2 Spanish learners, and advanced L2 English learners. To answer this question, lexical items with considerable phonological, semantic, and orthographic overlap (cognates) and lexical items with no phonological overlap with their English translation equivalents (non-cognates) were examined. The results indicate that there is a significant effect of cognate status in the Spanish production of VOT by Spanish–English bilinguals. These bilinguals produced /t/ with longer VOT values (more English-like) in the Spanish production of cognates compared to non-cognate words. It is proposed that the exemplar model of lexical representation (Bybee, 2001; Pierrehumbert, 2001) can be extended to include bilingual lexical connections by which cognates facilitate phonetic interference in the bilingual mental lexicon.
The present study examines the effect of language switching on phonetic production, contributing to an understanding of the underlying interaction between a bilingual's two phonetic systems. While phonetic interaction has been studied in non-switched and code-switched paradigms, effects of connected speech (e.g. speech planning, pragmatics, etc.) may obscure underlying phonetic interaction. To investigate the impact of language switching, a cued picture-naming task was employed, with Spanish–English bilinguals of differing dominance profiles naming pictures in English and Spanish. Stimuli were produced both as switched and non-switched tokens. Addressing the impact of context, stimuli were presented in three contexts varying in quantity of language. Results indicate an asymmetrical effect of language switching on voice onset time. Specifically, both Spanish-dominant and English-dominant bilinguals demonstrated unidirectional transfer, with the dominant language significantly impacted by language switching. Drawing parallels with findings of asymmetrical temporal costs found at the lexical level, and resulting theoretical models, implications are discussed with reference to possible inhibitory mechanisms at play in bilingual phonetic selection and switching.
Behavioral and event-related potential (ERP) measures are reported for a study in which relatively proficient Chinese-English bilinguals named identical pictures in each of their two languages. Production occurred only in Chinese (the first language, L1) or only in English (the second language, L2) in a given block with the order counterbalanced across participants. The repetition of pictures across blocks was expected to produce facilitation in the form of faster responses and more positive ERPs. However, we hypothesized that if both languages are activated when naming one language alone, there might be evidence of inhibition of the stronger L1 to enable naming in the weaker L2. Behavioral data revealed the dominance of Chinese relative to English, with overall faster and more accurate naming performance in L1 than L2. However, reaction times for naming in L1 after naming in L2 showed no repetition advantage and the ERP data showed greater negativity when pictures were named in L1 following L2. This greater negativity for repeated items suggests the presence of inhibition rather than facilitation alone. Critically, the asymmetric negativity associated with the L1 when it followed the L2 endured beyond the immediate switch of language, implying long-lasting inhibition of the L1. In contrast, when L2 naming followed L1, both behavioral and ERP evidence produced a facilitatory pattern, consistent with repetition priming. Taken together, the results support a model of bilingual lexical production in which candidates in both languages compete for selection, with inhibition of the more dominant L1 when planning speech in the less dominant L2. We discuss the implications for modeling the scope and time course of inhibitory processes.
This study examined the French syllables /tu/ (‘‘tous’’) and /ty/ (‘‘tu’’) produced in three speaking tasks by native speakers of American English and French talkers living in the U. S. In a paired‐comparison task listeners correctly identified more of the vowels produced by French than American talkers, and more vowels produced by experienced than inexperienced American speakers of French. An acoustic analysis revealed that the American talkers produced /u/ with significantly higher F2 values than the French talkers, but produced /y/ with F2 values equal to those of the French talkers. A labeling task revealed that the /y/ vowels produced by the experienced and inexperienced Americans were identified equally well, but that the experienced Americans produced a more identifiable /u/ than the inexperienced Americans. It is hypothesized that English speakers learn French /y/ rapidly because this vowel is not—like French /u/—judged to be equivalent to a vowel of English. The French and American talkers produced /t/ with equal VOT values of about 55 ms, which is intermediate to values commonly observed for monolingual speakers of French and English. It is hypothesized that the bilingual talkers judged the /t/ of French and English to be equivalent, which affected their perceptual target for French /t/ and ultimately their production of this stop.
We report three experiments exploring the occurrence of perceptually-guided changes in speech production by a speaker well past the critical period for language acquisition. A first experiment shows that listeners sharing our speaker's native language (Brazilian Portuguese) can distinguish her productions in that language as having been produced either after recent experience in Brazil or after recent experience producing and listening to English in the United States. In contrast, native English speaking listeners cannot distinguish our speaker's English productions by recent experience. Acoustic measurements of our speaker's voiceless stops produced in both Brazilian Portuguese and English show that, whereas her VOTs are always shorter for productions in Brazilian Portuguese than in English, VOTs of stops produced in both languages are shorter after a several month stay in Brazil than after a several month stay in the United States. We offer a theoretical account of the findings.
In an experimental study of language switching and selection, bilinguals named numerals in either their first or second language unpredictably. Response latencies (RTs) on switch trials (where the response language changed from the previous trial) were slower than on nonswitch trials. As predicted, the language-switching cost was consistently larger when switching to the dominant L₁ from the weaker L₂ than vice versa such that, on switch trials, L₁ responses were slower than in L₂. This "paradoxical" asymmetry in the cost of switching languages is explained in terms of differences in relative strength of the bilingual's two languages and the involuntary persistence of the previous language set across an intended switch of language. Naming in the weaker language, L₂, requires active inhibition or suppression of the stronger competitor language, L₁; the inhibition persists into the following (switch) trial in the form of "negative priming" of the L₁ lexicon as a whole. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
This study investigates whether proficient second language (L2) speakers of Spanish and English use the same parsing strategies as monolinguals when reading temporarily ambiguous sentences containing a complex noun phrase followed by a relative clause, such as Peter fell in love with the daughter of the psychologist who studied in California . Research with monolingual Spanish and English speakers (e.g., Cuetos & Mitchell, 1988) has suggested that, whereas English speakers show a bias to interpret the relative clause locally (i.e., to attach the relative clause to the noun immediately preceding it), Spanish speakers reading Spanish equivalents of English sentences attach the relative clause to the first noun in the complex noun phrase (i.e., nonlocal attachment). In this study, I assess whether speakers whose native language (L1) and L2 differ with respect to processing strategies were able to employ each strategy in the correct context. To this end, L1 Spanish–L2 English and L1 English–L2 Spanish speakers read ambiguous sentences in their L1 and L2. Data collection was carried out using a pencil-and-paper questionnaire and a self-paced reading task. Analyses of both sets of data revealed that both groups of speakers favored local over nonlocal attachment when reading in their L1 and L2. The results are discussed in the context of models that assume the existence of a fixed, universal set of parsing strategies. The implications of L2 parsing research for the field of SLA are also discussed.
A series of three lexical decision experiments showed that interlingual homographs may be recognized faster than, slower than, or as fast as monolingual control words depending on task requirements and language intermixing. In Experiment 1, Dutch bilingual participants performed an English lexical decision task including English/Dutch homographs, cognates, and purely English control words. Reaction times to interlingual homographs were unaffected by the frequency of the Dutch reading and did not differ from monolingual controls. In contrast, cognates were recognized faster than controls. In Experiment 2, Dutch participants again performed an English lexical decision task on homographs, but, apart from nonwords, Dutch words were included which required a “no” reaction. Strong inhibition effects were obtained which depended on the relative frequency difference of the two readings of the homograph. These turned into frequency-dependent facilitation effects in Experiment 3, where participants performed a general lexical decision task, responding “yes” if a word of either language was presented. It is argued that bilingual word recognition models can only account for the series of experiments if they explain how lexical processing is affected by task demands and stimulus list composition.
Two eye-tracking experiments examined spoken language processing in Russian-English bilinguals. The proportion of looks to objects whose names were phonologically similar to the name of a target object in either the same language (within-language competition), the other language (between-language competition), or both languages at the same time (simultaneous competition) was compared to the proportion of looks in a control condition in which no objects overlapped phonologically with the target. Results support previous findings of parallel activation of lexical items within and between languages, but suggest that the magnitude of the between-language competition effect may vary across first and second languages and may be mediated by a number of factors such as stimuli, language background, and language mode.
Research into spoken word production has often focused on the interaction of lexical selection processes and phonological planning. Less attention has been given to the relationship between phonological planning and articulatory processes. The current study considers evidence from the tongue-twister paradigm to investigate such potential interactions. Acoustic analyses of various parameters of obstruents voicing in tongue twister productions show that errors induced in tongue twisters leave acoustic “traces” of the intended target. For example, the voice-onset time of “k”→[g] error tokens had a mean VOT that was longer than correctly produced “g”→[g] tokens, reflecting a trace of the voiceless [k] target. This effect is attributed to the cascade of partially activated phonological representations of the target consonant into articulatory processes. Consistent with this account, a post-hoc analysis revealed an additional influence of cascading activation from word-level processes; traces of the target were reduced in word outcomes relative to nonword outcomes. Finally, extension of these analyses to a set of secondary cues to obstruent voicing showed that non-local cues are not influenced by tongue twister production errors.
In 2 experiments, relatively proficient Chinese-English bilinguals decided whether Chinese words were the correct translations of English words. Critical trials were those on which incorrect translations were related in lexical form or meaning to the correct translation. In Experiment 1, behavioral interference was revealed for both distractor types, but event-related potentials (ERPs) revealed a different time course for the 2 conditions. Semantic distractors elicited effects primarily on the N400 and late positive component (LPC), with a smaller N400 and a smaller LPC over the posterior scalp but a larger LPC over the anterior scalp relative to unrelated controls. In contrast, translation form distractors elicited a larger P200 and a larger LPC than did unrelated controls. To determine whether the translation form effects were enabled by the relatively long, 750-ms stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between words, a 2nd ERP experiment was conducted using a shorter, 300-ms, SOA. The behavioral results revealed interference for both types of distractors, but the ERPs again revealed different loci for the 2 effects. Taken together, the data suggest that proficient bilinguals activate 1st-language translations of words in the 2nd language after they have accessed the meaning of those words. The implications of this pattern for claims about the nature of cross-language activation when bilinguals read in 1 or both languages are discussed.
Despite an impressive psycholinguistic effort to explore the way in which two or more languages are represented and controlled, controversy surrounds both issues. We argue that problems of representation and control are intimately connected and we propose that data from functional neuroimaging may advance a resolution. Neuroimaging data, we argue, support the notion that the neural representation of a second language converges with the representation of that language learned as a first language and that language production in bilinguals is a dynamic process involving cortical and subcortical structures that make use of inhibition to resolve lexical competition and to select the intended language.
Bilinguals have been shown to outperform monolinguals at suppressing task-irrelevant information. The present study aimed to identify how processing linguistic ambiguity during auditory comprehension may be associated with inhibitory control. Monolinguals and bilinguals listened to words in their native language (English) and identified them among four pictures while their eye-movements were tracked. Each target picture (e.g., hamper) appeared together with a similar-sounding within-language competitor picture (e.g., hammer) and two neutral pictures. Following each eye-tracking trial, priming probe trials indexed residual activation of target words, and residual inhibition of competitor words. Eye-tracking showed similar within-language competition across groups; priming showed stronger competitor inhibition in monolinguals than in bilinguals, suggesting differences in how inhibitory control was used to resolve within-language competition. Notably, correlation analyses revealed that inhibition performance on a nonlinguistic Stroop task was related to linguistic competition resolution in bilinguals but not in monolinguals. Together, monolingual-bilingual comparisons suggest that cognitive control mechanisms can be shaped by linguistic experience.
This study examines the time course of inhibitory processes in Spanish-English bilinguals, using the procedure described in Macizo, Bajo, and Martín. Bilingual participants were required to decide whether pairs of English words were related. Critical word pairs contained a word that shared the same orthography across languages but differed in meaning (interlingual homographs such as pie, meaning foot in Spanish). In Expts 1 and 2, participants were slower to respond to homographs presented along with words related to the Spanish meaning of the homograph as compared to control words. This result agrees with the view that bilinguals non-selectively activate their two languages irrespective of the language they are using. In addition, bilinguals also slowed their responses when the English translation of the Spanish homograph meaning was presented 500 ms after responding to homographs (Expt 1). This result suggests that bilinguals inhibited the irrelevant homograph meaning. However, the inhibitory effect was not observed in Expt 2 when the between-trial interval was fixed to 750 ms which suggests that inhibition decayed over time.