Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-65d66dc8c9-5dn7x Total loading time: 0.803 Render date: 2021-09-29T01:42:27.540Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Cross-language semantic influences in different script bilinguals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2017

TAMAR DEGANI*
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
ANAT PRIOR
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
WALAA HAJAJRA
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
*
Address for correspondence: Tamar Degani, Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa, Israel, tdegani@research.haifa.ac.il

Abstract

The current study examined automatic activation and semantic influences from the non-target language of different-script bilinguals during visual word processing. Thirty-four Arabic–Hebrew bilinguals and 34 native Hebrew controls performed a semantic relatedness task on visually presented Hebrew word pairs. In one type of critical trials, cognate primes between Arabic and Hebrew preceded related Hebrew target words. In a second type, false-cognate primes preceded Hebrew targets related to the Arabic meaning (but not the Hebrew meaning) of the false-cognate. Although Hebrew orthography is a fully reliable cue of language membership, facilitation on cognate trials and interference on false-cognate trials were observed for Arabic–Hebrew bilinguals. The activation of the non-target language was sufficient to influence participants’ semantic decisions in the target language, demonstrating simultaneous activation of both languages even for different-script bilinguals in a single language context. To discuss the findings we refine existing models of bilingual processing to accommodate different-script bilinguals.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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 work was supported by EU-FP7 grant CIG-322016 to TD.

References

Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of memory and language, 59, 390412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowers, J. S., Mimouni, Z., & Arguin, M. (2000). Orthography plays a critical role in cognate priming: Evidence from French/English and Arabic/French cognates. Memory & Cognition, 28, 12891296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruyer, R., & Brysbaert, M. (2011). Combining speed and accuracy in cognitive psychology: Is the Inverse Efficiency Score (IES) a better dependent variable than the mean Reaction Time (RT) and the Percentage of Errors (PE)? Psychologica Belgica, 51, 513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casaponsa, A., Carreiras, M., & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2014). Discriminating languages in bilingual contexts: The impact of orthographic markedness. Frontiers in Psychology, 5: 424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casaponsa, A., Carreiras, M., & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2015). How do bilinguals identify the language of the words they read? Brain Research, 1624, 153166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casaponsa, A., & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2016). Lexical organization of language-ambiguous and language-specific words in bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 589604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Degani, T., Prior, A., & Tokowicz, N. (2011). Bidirectional transfer: The effect of sharing a translation. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degani, T., & Tokowicz, N. (2010). Semantic ambiguity within and across languages: An integrative review. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 12661303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (1998). The BIA model and bilingual word recognition. In Grainger, J. & Jacobs, A.M. (eds.), Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition, pp. 189225. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T. (2005). Bilingual Visual Word Recognition and Lexical Access. In Kroll, J. F., & De Groot, A. M. B. (Eds.). Handbook of Bilingualism. Psycholinguistic Approaches (pp. 179–201). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (2002). The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 175197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 496518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T., Miwa, K., Brummelhuis, B., Sappelli, M., & Baayen, H. (2010). How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 284301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & Carreiras, M. (2011). Phonology by itself: Masked phonological priming effects with and without orthographic overlap. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23, 185203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francis, W. S. (2005). Bilingual semantic and conceptual representation. In Kroll, J. F. & Groot, A. M. B. De (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
GollanT., H. T., H., Forster, K., & Frost, R. (1997). Translation priming with different scripts: Masked priming with cognates and noncognates in Hebrew-English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 11221139.Google ScholarPubMed
Hoshino, N., & Kroll, J. F. (2008). Cognate effects in picture naming: Does cross-language activation survive a change of script? Cognition, 106, 501511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of memory and language, 59, 434446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 4777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography, 1, 736. DOI 10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, A., Reddy, S., Pomikálek, J., & Avinesh, P.V.S (2010). A Corpus Factory for Many Languages. In LREC workshop on Web Services and Processing Pipelines, Malta, May 2010.Google Scholar
Kim, J., & Davis, C. (2003). Task effects in masked cross-script translation and phonological priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 484499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lagrou, E., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Duyck, W. (2011). Knowledge of a second language influences auditory word recognition in the native language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 952965.Google ScholarPubMed
Lemhöfer, K., & Dijkstra, T. (2004). Recognizing cognates and interlingual homographs: Effects of code similarity in language-specific and generalized lexical decision. Memory & Cognition, 32, 533550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Libben, M. R., & Titone, D. A. (2009). Bilingual lexical access in context: Evidence from eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 381390.Google ScholarPubMed
Major, R. C. (2008). Transfer in second language phonology: A review. In Edwards, J. G. H and Zampini, M. L. (Eds), Phonology and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 6394). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V., & Spivey, M. (2003). Competing activation in bilingual language processing: Within- and between-language competition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 97115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 940967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miwa, K., Dijkstra, T., Bolger, P., & Baayen, H. (2014). Reading English with Japanese in mind: Effects of frequency, phonology, and meaning in different-script bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 445463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno-Martínez, F. J., & Montoro, P. R. (2012). An ecological alternative to Snodgrass & Vanderwart: 360 high quality colour images with norms for seven psycholinguistic variables. PlosOne, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2012). Cross-script phonological priming for Japanese–English bilinguals: Evidence for integrated phonological representations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 15631583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakayama, M., Sears, C. R., Hino, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2013). Masked translation priming with Japanese–English bilinguals: Interactions between cognate status, target frequency and L2 proficiency. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 949981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakayama, M., Verdonschot, R. G., Sears, C. R., & Lupker, S. J. (2014). The masked cognate translation priming effect for different-script bilinguals is modulated by the phonological similarity of cognate words: Further support for the phonological account. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26, 714724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oganian, Y., Conrad, M., Aryani, A., & Spalek, K. (2015). Interplay of bigram frequency and orthographic neighborhood statistics in language membership decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 578596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A. (2009). Conceptual representation in the bilingual lexicon and second language vocabulary learning. In Pavlenko, A. (Ed.). The bilingual mental lexicon: Interdisciplinary approaches. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 125–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prior, A., Degani, T., Awawdy, S., Yassin, R., & Korem, N. (2017). Is susceptibility to cross-language interference domain specific? Cognition, 165, 1025.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. (2007). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from www.R-project.org.Google Scholar
Shook, A., & Marian, V. (2013). The bilingual language interaction network for comprehension of speech. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 304324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spivey, M. J., & Marian, V. (1999). Cross talk between native and second languages: Partial activation of an irrelevant lexicon. Psychological Sciences, 10, 281284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thierry, G., & Wu, Y. J. (2007). Brain potentials reveal unconscious translation during foreign-language comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 1253012535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Assche, E., Drieghe, D., Duyck, W., Welvaert, M., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2011). The influence of semantic constraints on bilingual word recognition during sentence reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 88107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Hell, J., & de Groot, A. M. B. (1998). Conceptual representation in bilingual memory: Effects of concreteness and cognate status in word association. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 193221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Kesteren, R., Dijkstra, T., & de Smedt, K. (2012). Markedness effects in Norwegian–English bilinguals: Task-dependent use of language-specific letters and bigrams. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 21292154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voga, M., & Grainger, J. (2007). Cognate status and cross-script translation priming. Memory & Cognition, 35, 938952.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, Y. J., & Thierry, G. (2010). Chinese–English Bilinguals Reading English Hear Chinese. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 76467651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, H., Chen, B., Yang, M., & Dunlap, S. (2010). Language nonselective access to phonological representations: Evidence from Chinese–English bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 20512066.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Cross-language semantic influences in different script bilinguals
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Cross-language semantic influences in different script bilinguals
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Cross-language semantic influences in different script bilinguals
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *