Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:07:35.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differences in L1 linguistic attention control between monolinguals and bilinguals*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 December 2014

HILARY D. DUNCAN ,
NORMAN SEGALOWITZ  and
NATALIE A. PHILLIPS
HILARY D. DUNCAN
Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal, Québec
NORMAN SEGALOWITZ
Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal, Québec and Queensland University of Technology, Australia
NATALIE A. PHILLIPS*
Affiliation:
Conordia University and McGill University, Montréal, Québec
*
Address for correspondence: Natalie Phillips, Concordia University, Psychology Department, 7141 Sherbrooke West, Montreal, Quebec, H4B 1R6, CanadaNatalie.Phillips@Concordia.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Relational elements of language (e.g. spatial prepositions) act to direct attention to aspects of an incoming message. The listener or reader must be able to use these elements to focus and refocus attention on the mental representation being constructed. Research has shown that this type of attention control is specific to language and can be distinguished from attention control for non-relational (semantic or content) elements. Twenty-two monolinguals (18–30 years) and nineteen bilinguals (18–30 years) completed two conditions of an alternating-runs task-switching paradigm in their first language. The relational condition involved processing spatial prepositions, and the non-relational condition involved processing concrete nouns and adjectives. Overall, monolinguals had significantly larger shift costs (i.e. greater attention control burden) in the relational condition than the non-relational condition, whereas bilinguals performed similarly in both conditions. This suggests that proficiency in a second language has a positive impact on linguistic attention control in one's native language.

Keywords

bilingualismattention controltask switchinglinguistic attention control
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , January 2016 , pp. 106 - 121
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Canadian Graduate Scholarship awarded to the first author. This work was supported by Grant #203751 from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) to N.A. Phillips. The authors ackowledge the constructive comments of the reviewers. We gratefully acknowledge the members of the Cognition, Aging and Psychophysiology (CAP) Lab for their assistance in this research and the research participants for their time and effort.

References

Abutalebi, J., Cappa, S. F., & Perani, D. (2001). The bilingual brain as revealed by functional neuroimaging. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 179–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abutalebi, J., & Green, D. (2007). Bilingual language production: The neurocognition of language representation and control. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 20, 242–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2006). Effect of bilingualism and computer video game experience on the Simon task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 68–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E. (2011). Coordination of executive functions in monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110, 461–468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Grady, C., Chau, W., Ishii, R., Gunji, A., & Pantev, C. (2005). Effect of bilingualism on cognitive control in the Simon task: Evidence from MEG. NeuroImage, 24, 40–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Green, D. W., & Gollan, T. H. (2009). Bilingual minds. Association for Psychological Science, 10, 89–129.Google ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G. (2008a). Lexical access in bilinguals: Effects of vocabulary size and executive control. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21, 522–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G. (2008b). Cognitive control and lexical access in younger and older bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 859–873.Google ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., & DePape, A. M. (2009). Musical expertise, bilingualism, and executive functioning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 565–574.Google ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., & Luk, G. (2012). Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 397–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biassou, N., Obler, L. K., Nespoulous, J.-L., Dordain, M., & Harris, K. S. (1997). Dual processing of open- and closed-class words. Brain and Language, 57, 360–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bishop, D. (2003). The Test for Reception of Grammar, version 2 (TROG-2). London: Pearson Assessment.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1996). Learning how to structure space for language: Across-linguistic perspective. In Bloom, P., Peterson, M. A., Nadel, L. & Garrett, M. F. (eds.), Language and space, pp. 385–436. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, M., & Choi, S. (2003). Space under construction: Language-specific spatial categorization in first language acquisition. In Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in mind, pp. 387–428. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caplan, D. (2001). Functional neuroimaging studies of syntactic processing. Journal of Psycholinguist Research, 30, 297–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamberland, C., Saint-Aubin, J., & Légère, M.-A. (2013). The impact of text repetition on content and function words during reading: Further evidence from eye movements. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 94–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, A., Hernández, M., Costa-Faidella, J., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2009). On the bilingual advantage in conflict processing: Now you see it, now you don’t. Cognition, 113, 135–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, A., Hernández, M., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2008). Bilingualism aids conflict resolution: Evidence from the ANT task. Cognition, 106, 59–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Angelis, G. (2005). Interlanguage transfer of function words, Language Learning, 55, 379–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Bot, K. (1992) A bilingual processing model: Levelt's “speaking” model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1–24.Google Scholar
Dong, Y., Gui, S., & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Shared and separate meanings in the bilingual mental lexicon. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8, 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, K., Luk, G., Pyers, J. E., & Bialystok, E. (2008). The source of enhanced cognitive control in bilinguals: Evidence from bimodal bilinguals. Psychological Science, 19, 1201–1206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friederici, A. D., Opitz, B., & Von Cramon, D. Y. (2000). Segregating semantic and syntactic aspects of processing in the human brain: An fMRI investigation of different word types. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 698–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friederici, A. D., Ruschemeyer, S. A., Hahne, A., & Fiebach, C. J. (2003). The role of left inferior frontal and superior temporal cortex in sentence comprehension: Localizing syntactic and semantic processes. Cerebral Cortex, 13, 170–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Froud, K. (2001). Prepositions and the lexical/functional divide: Aphasic evidence. Lingua, 111, 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garbin, G., Sanjuan, A., Forn, C., Bustamante, J. C., Rodriguez-Pujadas, A., Belloch, V., Hernández, M., Costa, A., & Avila, C. (2010). Bridging language and attention: Brain basis of the impact of bilingualism on cognitive control. Neuroimage, 53, 1272–1278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gautier, V., O’Regan, J. K., & Le Gargasson, J.-F. (2000). “The-skipping” revisited in French: Programming saccades to skip the article “les”. Vision Research, 40, 2517–2531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, D. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., Pickering, M. J., & Veltkamp, E. (2004). Is syntax separate or shared between languages: Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in Spanish–English bilinguals. Psychological Science, 15, 409–414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hernández, M., Martin, C. D., Barceló, F., & Costa, A. (2013). Where is the bilingual advantage in task-switching? Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 257–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilchey, M. D., & Klein, R. M. (2011). Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 625–658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kousaie, S., & Phillips, N. A. (2012). Conflict monitoring and resolution: Are two languages better than one? Evidence from reaction time and event-related brain potentials. Brain Research, 1446, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., Misra, M., & Guo, T. (2008). Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes. Acta Psychologica, 128, 416–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, J. F., Bogulski, C. A., & McClain, R. (2012). Psycholinguistic perspectives on second language learning and bilingualism: The course and consequence of cross-language competition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar (vol. 1): Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1995) The ability to speak: From intentions to spoken words. European Review, 3, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meuter, R. F. I., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language-switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, E. B., & Gollan, T. H. (2005). Being and becoming bilingual: Individual differences and consequences for language production. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 389–407. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Munte, T. F., Wieringa, B. M., Weyerts, H., Szentkuti, A., Matzke, M., & Johannes, S. (2001). Differences in brain potentials to open and closed class words: Class and frequency effects. Neuropsychologia, 39, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nappa, R. L., January, D., Gleitman, L. R., & Trueswell, J. C. (2004). Paying attention to attention: Perceptual priming effects on word order. In Forbus, K., Gentner, D. & Regier, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 999–1004. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Neville, H. J., Mills, D. L., & Lawson, D. S. (1992). Fractionating language: Different neural subsystems with different sensitive periods. Cerebral Cortex, 2, 244–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nobre, A. C., & McCarthy, G. (1994). Language related ERPs – scalp distributions and modulation by word type and semantic priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 233–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paap, K. R., & Greenberg, Z. I. (2013). There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 232–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, N. A., Segalowitz, N., O’Brien, I., & Yamasaki, N. (2004). Semantic priming in a first and second language: Evidence from reaction time variability and event-related brain potentials. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, A., & Gollan, T. (2011). Good language-switchers are good task-switchers: Evidence from Spanish–English and Mandarin–English bilinguals. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prior, A., & MacWhinney, B. (2010). A bilingual advantage in task switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 253–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reynolds, C. R. (2002). Comprehensive Trail-Making Test. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy-Charland, A., Saint-Aubin, J., Klein, R. M., & Lawrence, M. (2007). Eye movements as direct tests of the GO model for the missing-letter effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 69, 324–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Segalowitz, N. (2010). Cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Freed, B. F. (2004). Context, contact and cognition in oral fluency acquisition: Learning Spanish in At Home and Study Abroad contexts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 173–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Frenkiel-Fishman, S. (2005). Attention control and ability level in a complex cognitive skill: Attention shifting and second-language proficiency. Memory & Cognition, 33, 644–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In Gumperz, J. J. & Levinson, S. C. (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, pp. 70–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swinney, D., Zurif, E. G., & Cutler, E. (1980). Effects of sentential stress and word class comprehension in Broca's aphasics. Brain and Language, 10, 132–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics (2 vols.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Taube-Schiff, M., & Segalowitz, N. (2005a). Linguistic attention control: Attention shifting governed by grammaticized elements of language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 508–519.Google ScholarPubMed
Taube-Schiff, M., & Segalowitz, N. (2005b). Within-language attention control in second language processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8, 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomlin, R. S. (1997). Mapping conceptual representations into linguistic representations: The role of attention in grammar. In Nuyts, J. & Pederson, E. (eds.), Language and conceptualization, pp. 162–189. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1991). Influences of semantic and syntactic content on open and closed class words. Memory & Cognition, 19, 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Von Studnitz, R. E., & Green, D. W. (2002). Interlingual homograph interference in German–English bilinguals: Its modulation and locus of control. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Xiang, J., Kotecha, R., Vannest, J., Liu, Y., Rose, D., Schapir, M., & Degrauw, T. (2008). Spatial and frequency differences of neuromagnetic activities between the perception of open- and closed-class words. Brain Topography, 21, 75–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D. (1997). Weschler memory scale for adults (3rd edn.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar