Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T08:48:57.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are multiword frequency effects stronger in non-native than in native speakers?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2023

Tomomi Ishida Open the ORCID record for Tomomi Ishida [Opens in a new window]
Tomomi Ishida*
Affiliation:
Nihon Fukushi University, Aichi, Japan
*
Corresponding author: Tomomi Ishida, 35-6 Egemae, Okuda, Mihama-cho, Chita-gun, Aichi, 470-3233, Japan Email: tomomii@n-fukushi.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated whether non-native English speakers showed a processing advantage for high-frequency multiword units (multiword frequency effects), and whether the effects differed between native and non-native speakers. Such a difference has been identified in relation to single-word processing. Native English speakers and intermediate learners of English with languages of different scripts (native speakers of Japanese and German) judged whether English multiword units were grammatical. A significant processing advantage was identified for both native and non-native participants. More importantly, the multiword frequency effects were stronger among non-native than native speakers. The discrepancy persisted even after including individual vocabulary knowledge as a predictor in the mixed-effect models. Furthermore, there was no significant different impact of the effects between two non-native groups, even though German participants responded quicker than Japanese participants. This indicates that the varying influence between L1 and L2 could be explained by within-language, not between-language, variables.

Keywords

Multiword frequency effectsGrammaticality judgment tasksVocabulary knowledgeProcessing advantage
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , May 2024 , pp. 295 - 305
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

References

Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent word-combinations. In Cowie, A. P. (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, Analysis and applications (pp. 101–122). Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. (2009). A corpus-driven approach to formulaic language in English: Multi-word patterns in speech and writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(3), 275–311. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.3.08bib.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BNC Consortium. (2001). The British national corpus (second version). Shogakukan corpus network [Distributor]. http://scnweb.jkn21.com/BNC2/.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Lagrou, E., & Stevens, M. (2017). Visual word recognition in a second language: A test of the lexical entrenchment hypothesis with lexical decision times. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(3), 530–548. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728916000353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, T. C. (1999). Processing of idioms by L2 learners of English. TESOL Quarterly, 33(2), 233–262. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cop, U., Keuleers, E., Drieghe, D., & Duyck, W. (2015). Frequency effects in monolingual and bilingual natural reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22(5), 1216–1234. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0819-2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, M. (2008). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/.Google Scholar
Diependaele, K., Lemhöfer, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). The word frequency effect in first- and second-language word recognition: A lexical entrenchment account. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(5), 843–863. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.720994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duyck, W., Vanderelst, D., Desmet, T., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2008). The frequency effect in second-language visual word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15(4), 850–855. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.4.850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 35(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03195503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibbs, R. W., & Gonzales, G. P. (1985). Syntactic frozenness in processing and remembering idioms. Cognition, 20(3), 243–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(85)90010-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Cera, C., & Sandoval, T. C. (2008). More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(3), 787–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernández, M., Costa, A., & Arnon, I. (2016). More than words: Multiword frequency effects in non-native speakers. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(6), 785–800. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1152389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K. (1986). Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 40(6), 431–439. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03208203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irujo, S. (1993). Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms. IRAL – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 31(3), 205–220. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.1993.31.3.205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., & Nekrasova, T. M. (2007). The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 433–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00589.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, S. H., & Kim, J. H. (2012). Frequency effects in L2 multiword unit processing: Evidence from self-paced reading. TESOL Quarterly, 46(4), 831–841. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuperman, V., Bertram, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2008). Morphological dynamics in compound processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(7–8), 1089–1132. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802193688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 325–343. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lemhöfer, K., Dijkstra, T., Schriefers, H., Baayen, R. H., Grainger, J., & Zwitserlood, P. (2008). Native language influences on word recognition in a second language: A megastudy. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(1), 12–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mor, B., & Prior, A. (2020). Individual differences in L2 frequency effects in different script bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 24(4), 672–690. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006919876356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mor, B., & Prior, A. (2022). Frequency and predictability effects in first and second language of different script bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Language. Memory and Cognition, 48(9), 1363–1383. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000927.Google ScholarPubMed
Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., & Zorzi, M. (2007). Nested incremental modeling in the development of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud. Psychological Review, 114(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rayner, K. (2009). The Thirty-Fifth Sir Frederick Bartlett Lecture: Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902816461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition, 14(3), 191–201. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team. (2013). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., & Underwood, G. (2004). Exploring the processing of formulaic sequences through a self-paced reading task. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Language learning and language teaching, (Vol. 9). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 173–189). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.9.10sch.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., Grandage, S., & Adolphs, S. (2004). Are corpus-derived recurrent clusters psycholinguistically valid? In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 127–151). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.9.08sch.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schröter, P., & Schroeder, S. (2018). Differences in visual word recognition between L1 and L2 speakers: The impact of length, frequency, and orthographic neighborhood size in German children. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(2), 319–339. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011a). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and non-native speakers. Second Language Research, 27(2), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658310382068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2011b). Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(3), 776–784. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tiffin-Richards, S. P., & Schroeder, S. (2015). Word length and frequency effects on children's eye movements during silent reading. Vision Research, 113(A), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2015.05.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C. (2011). Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning, 61(2), 569–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00622.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitford, V., & Titone, D. (2012). Second-language experience modulates first- and second-language word frequency effects: Evidence from eye movement measures of natural paragraph reading. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19(1), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0179-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2011). Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 430–449. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2013). Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing: A comparison of congruent and incongruent collocations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(3), 451–482. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, D. (2010). Formulaic language and second language speech fluency: Background, evidence and classroom applications. Continuum.Google Scholar
Wray, A., & Perkins, M. R. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language and Communication, 20(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(99)00015-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Ishida supplementary material

Ishida supplementary material
Download Ishida supplementary material(File)
File 23.4 KB